On CHOW: Outlawing workplace candy
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 14 of 18:
Next »
« Previous
Getting off topic
and yes, I do agree, it is semantics. However, MS is not claiming their code is free (in any sense of the word) and then dropping 900 pages of legalese describing all the things you can't do with that "free" code. The same can't be said of GPL.

Don't get me wrong, I do understand what you are saying and I'm a very happy user of GPLv2 software. I just don't think it should be referred to as "free". Open? Yes. Free? No. Those are my semantics and the semantics of the people who have claimed what I'm claiming: that GPL code is not truly free.
Posted by: NonZealot   Posted on: 06/13/07 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Microsoft shares source code with AIDS researchers  Loverock Davidson | 06/13/07
What does Jobs do with his money?  NonZealot | 06/13/07
Same as he did for his daughter, Lisa.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 06/13/07
How can you be sure?  Michael Kelly | 06/13/07
To his credit  Loverock Davidson | 06/13/07
A dollar. Well, you get what you pay for.  James T. Kirk | 06/13/07
And this is about  Freebird54 | 06/15/07
SCOPE OF RIGHTS:  Michael Kelly | 06/13/07
I think you misunderstand  NonZealot | 06/13/07
Exactly (nt)  rapson | 06/13/07
Depends on what you are talking about  Michael Kelly | 06/13/07
Only comparing GPL to other licenses  NonZealot | 06/13/07
Semantics  Michael Kelly | 06/13/07
Getting off topic  NonZealot | 06/13/07
Also  Michael Kelly | 06/13/07
No issue for me...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 06/13/07
i know, snobbish people prefer to pay  galileon | 06/14/07
Of course you wouldn't.  nighthawk808 | 06/17/07

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here