Mark Kent wrote:
> begin oe_protect.scr
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> __/ [ Doug Mentohl ] on Friday 17 November 2006 14:55 \__
>>
>>> "GPL version 3 will be adjusted so the effect of the current deal is
>>> that Microsoft will by giving away access to the very patents
>>> Microsoft is trying to assert."
>>>
>>> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20061116103031303
>>
>> Let's see how Ballmer likes /that/. Can we add a clause which states that
>> no monkeys are allowed to use GPLv3-licensed software?
>
> This move seemed like such an obvious and clear next step. In many
> respects, it's a great shame that so many objected to GPL3 for so long -
> had it already been in place, perhaps the Novell disaster might not have
> happened.
>
After the last statements about GPL3 I am even *more* against it than
before.
I do *not* want a software licence which tries to solve political/social
matters which have nothing to do with software and IP. It is as wrong as
software patents are
--
Clippy: "It looks like you're trying to sue us,
would you like me to delete all of your files?"
|
|
