Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] GPL vs BSD vs Exploitation by Predatory Monopoly

none <byron@upstairs> espoused:
> In article <10128867.8tItTksYdb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Roy Schestowitz  <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>GPL and BSD : impact
>>
>>,----[ Quote ]
>>| Corporations like Microsoft love the BSD-style licenses. Case in point is the 
>>| Microsoft NT TCP/IP stack, which is basically a binary copy of the BSD TCP/IP 
>>| stack. With a BSD-Style license, while code can not be stolen, rights of 
>>| ownership cannot be enforced either.   
>>| 
>>http://zerias.blogspot.com/2008/01/gpl-and-bsd-impact.html
> 
> The blog author did make one mistake. He has the following as a GPL
> rule:
> 
> -------------------------
> #4: Everybody who modifies the source code must submit the changes back
> to the original author
> -------------------------
> 
> That's not correct. Modifiers of GPL software are obligated to
> distribute modifications downstream, not upstream. If I modify someone's
> code then I have to give the source of the modification to anyone I give
> the software to. That may or may not include the original author.
> 
> In practice modifications are a public distribution. But there's nothing
> in the GPL that requires the distribution be public.
> 

Quite correct, but then there is also nothing in the GPL which prevents
the "upstream" recipient of the code from publishing it on their
website, thus making it public.

To put it another way, there is virtually nothing to be gained from
*not* making it public.

-- 
| Mark Kent   --   mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk          |
| Cola faq:  http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/   |
| Cola trolls:  http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/                        |
| My (new) blog:  http://www.thereisnomagic.org                        |

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index