Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
Maybe that is because you are looking at it as a developer, and not
as an end user. It is the freedom of the end users that is being
preserved.
No, that is exactly backwards. Since the GPL only prohibits
redistribution, a developer is perfectly free to combine components as
he wants for his own use. Or companies that can afford it can hire a
developer to do this in custom code that is not redistributed. It's
the end users that aren't developers and can only afford things
distributed at mass market prices that lose any chance of benefits.
They just never even see it.
Explain the problem.
End user needs code containing many GPL'd routines plus some routines
only available under different licensing. The functionality of windows
media player would be one such example - or perhaps the netflix player
that depends on it. Sometimes you can work around this with a
plug-in-interface (which still leaves the GPL requirements in question);
sometimes you can't. When you can't, the end user pays the cost of
re-implementing all of the functionality that might otherwise have been
provided by well-tested code under the GPL. And even when this can be
done with a plug-in interface, it is still problematic for an individual
end user to obtain the needed licensed modules compared to a vendor
obtaining a bulk deal and rolling it into the price of the product.
If it is for his/her own use, then he is an end
user. The company is also an end user, and because the source is
available, they can afford to develop custom code. It is just the
developer that wants to take GPL protected code, modify it, and sell it
that faces restrictions. In the cases you list, the GPL does not make it
more or less likely that the code will be released.
Do you believe that OS X could have been built on Linux instead of
freebsd code? I don't know the internals but would assume that they
have added parts that are under license from others or covered by
patents and cannot be released under the GPL. In any case it would not
seem wise for any business to start a project knowing that they would
never be able to include components licensed from third parties under
any terms they might find agreeable.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
