The inq: Linux fundamentalists declare fatwa on Microsoft-Novell Deal

[nocturn]

The inquirer has an opinion piece about the GPLv3 here:
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38530



THE FREE SOFTWARE Foundation has declared a jihad on Microsoft and Novell's licensing deal and has declared that it will wreck it using the latest draft of the GPv3.

Peter Brown, executive director of the Free Software Association told Reuters that Open Saucers need to make sure that such deals "don't make a mockery of the goals of free software".
...


I wrote a blog piece about this here: http://nocturn.vsbnet.be/?q=node/41 and mailed the author:



Hi Nick

You probably get tons of mail about this subject, but I could not resist mailing you about this article.

I wrote a blog article in response to your claims, which I percieve as being false. You can find the blog here: http://nocturn.vsbnet.be/?q=node/41

My main point focuses on the fact that the GPLv3 changes nothing to the spirit of v2, which is to protect the 4 freedoms set out in The Free Software Definition here: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

v3 however is adapted to the new era in which software patents are a big threat (even MS got bitten by the MP3 patent). The ammending for the MS Novell deal is mainly to close a loophole which still existed in the previous draft and changes nothing to the spirit of the GPL, be it v2 or v3.

Specificly, the Novell case is not honoring freedom 2 and 3 of the Free Software definition as it would give Novell and it's customers rights not granted to other users of the software, possibly including the original author of the program.

So, there is nothing new to the movement and the GPLv3 is not a jihad. If MS or Novell do not honor or subscribe to the ideals set forward by this movement, they are free not to use the software created by it.

Kind regards


In my opinion, this piece spreads unneeded FUD about the GPLv3 and there is plenty of that going arround as it is.

[ice60]

i have a real dislike for anyone who goes on about the novell/MS deal, it's just one constant drone, like some old women. that's just me though.

i like novell, not only is it the only distro i can get installed on my SATA, software RAID hardware, they also helped setup the open invention network (http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/) for any company producing Free software, or just someone by themself, that gets sued for software patents. Novell will let them sue back using their patents.

MS is never going to sue anyone to do with Linux because linux will sue back. the Free software community will also be able to rewrite code quicker, and with less setbacks, then MS can. i always thought the deal was only so there can be no excuse for a company not to use Linux, and because of it more companies are now using linux, am i wrong about that?

back to that article - i know alot of people on the political left joined forces with muslims during all the stop the war stuff, but it's pretty offensive to start using muslim language like Fatwa and jihad out of context, isn't it? i don't think this guy should be taken very seriously!

what's the GPv3 and GPv2? is that another way of saying GPL? i haven't seen that before :|

[nocturn]

i have a real dislike for anyone who goes on about the novell/MS deal, it's just one constant drone, like some old women. that's just me though.


It's just an important issue for some people (including myself) and it pointed out quite clearly why we needed the GPLv3.

You may find the issue not important and maybe Linux can sue back, but the agreement clearly violates the 4 rights that are defined by the Free Software definition.


i always thought the deal was only so there can be no excuse for a company not to use Linux, and because of it more companies are now using linux, am i wrong about that?

Very wrong. The deal protects only Novell customers (paying ones) from patents litigation by MS. But it also gave MS munition to attack Linux because it now claims that Novell admits that Linux infriges on its patents. Which makes it easier for them to sue let's say Ubuntu...

In practice, the deal means that Novell cut out a slice of RedHat's business, but overall Linux usage hasn't grown because of it.



what's the GPv3 and GPv2? is that another way of saying GPL? i haven't seen that before :|

I'm sure they mean the GPL ;-)

[floke]

MS is never going to sue anyone to do with Linux because linux will sue back. the Free software community will also be able to rewrite code quicker, and with less setbacks, then MS can. i always thought the deal was only so there can be no excuse for a company not to use Linux, and because of it more companies are now using linux, am i wrong about that?|

Yep. The clause was inserted at the insistence of MS at the last minute. The purpose of it being that, although you and I and everyone else who uses Linux knows that MS won't sue over it, plenty of businesses don't - or won't want to take the risk of litigation. Thus, this deal allows MS to spread FUD about the legal status of Linux, thereby curtailing its use, especially in the commercial sector.

Maybe you should have read some of the 'droning' :)

[ice60]

Yep. The clause was inserted at the insistence of MS at the last minute. The purpose of it being that, although you and I and everyone else who uses Linux knows that MS won't sue over it, plenty of businesses don't - or won't want to take the risk of litigation. Thus, this deal allows MS to spread FUD about the legal status of Linux, thereby curtailing its use, especially in the commercial sector.

Maybe you should have read some of the 'droning' :)

OMG, i've read loads and asked about it, but yours is the first post that makes any sense lol

[nocturn]

Shortly after the deal, Ballmer announced this (emphasis mine):



"The deal that we announced at the end of last year with Novell I consider to be very important. It demonstrated clearly the value of intellectual property even in the Open Source world. I would not anticipate that we make a huge additional revenue stream from our Novell deal, but I do think it clearly establishes that Open Source is not free and Open Source will have to respect intellectual property rights of others just as any other competitor will."


This shows that MS considers this as an admission of guilt, one that they will use to threaten doubting customers back to the Windows franchise.

It is the very essense of their patent extortion scam, which they never have to prove in court.

[ice60]

right, i get it now. thanks, i can see there's more to it :mrgreen: