snip: As always, you could call Novel/SuSE and negotiate (read pay) for = custom=20 license terms. Thanx again. That was another question answered. fhd ----- Original Message -----=20 From: "Trent Shipley" To: Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2004 7:24 PM Subject: Re: Novell and SuSE > On Saturday 2004-01-17 18:44, Chris Gehlker wrote: > > On Jan 17, 2004, at 3:29 PM, Derek Neighbors wrote: > > > No one has called SuSE the devil. > > > > Certainly *you* haven't. I think some others have come pretty close. > > > > >> Sure it's important. It's just not, in my opinion, important = enough to > > >> justify using emotionally loaded words like 'Freedom' to = characterize > > > > > > I thing you are too emotionally hung up on the word based on prior > > > grievances. > > > > This is possible. I certainly do believe that the FSF, in advocating > > for goals that I share, has resorted to methods that I find = deceptive. > > I don't think they started out intending to be deceptive but I think > > that the egos of some folks at FSF won't let them see that there is = a > > loophole in the GPL. I have corresponded with people who tell me = that > > the whole impetus behind the RPL came when RMS himself went into > > complete denial about the very possibility that there could be a > > loophole in the GPL. I think that in many ways RMS is an admirable > > person but he is just too invested in a particular piece of text, = the > > GPL, to consider how it could be improved. > > > > >> one side. By granting users a right to redistribute the GPL = guarantees > > >> that *in practice* nobody is going to make a pile of money = reselling > > > > > > It doesn't guarantee it, but certainly it makes it difficult. > > > > > >> FOSS. SUSE just goes the extra step of denying de jure what the = GPL > > >> denies de facto. And while Red Hat may forgo the use of copyright = law > > > > > > If it is so guaranteed, then why do they feel it necessary to put = it in > > > writing? > > > > This is a question that I have asked myself and the only answer that = I > > can come up with is that they are simply being pig headed. Red Hat = put > > anaconda under the GPL and it hasn't hurt them any. I don't see how = any > > commercial advantage that accrues to SUSE could possibly outweigh = the > > bad publicity. >=20 > First, I think you need to realize hackers and Linux nerds are a very=20 > different population from most biz-folk. The MBA set are educated NOT = to=20 > care about their license terms. They care about TCO, being owned by=20 > proprietary software (eg. all our infrastructure runs on Oracle, we = cant=20 > change. The cost would ruin the company.), and clauses in an EULA = that might=20 > keep them from doing business (some MS clauses that rip holes in = security=20 > come close). >=20 > If a CIO the YAST license wouldn't bother me one little bit -- = remember almost=20 > everyone *uses* software. A good CIO buys software and tries hard not = to=20 > write software. As a CIO you do not want to waste time reading GPL = code --=20 > you *don't care* if you cand read the source code, if you have = employees=20 > reading source code then you've already done something incompetent. >=20 > From the Novel/SuSE POV there are good reasons they have the YAST = License. =20 >=20 > 1) There is comercial exclusion. It is illegal to make 1000 copies = of SuSE=20 > and sell them. Disgruntled employees cant take SuSE call it not-SuSE = and=20 > sell it cheap to all your customers. Under GPL they could, and you = would=20 > subsidize your competition. Subsidizing competition is generally=20 > contra-indicated. >=20 > 2) Even if I hack SYL licensed stuff, the result is SYL in perpetuity. >=20 > 3) There is recaputure. If you modify SYL code, you cannot sell the = code, but=20 > SuSE can. In essence by basing your work on YAST you give SuSE a not=20 > exlusive, no restriction rights to any intellectual content you = created so=20 > long as it is based on or includes any SYL content. >=20 > As always, you could call Novel/SuSE and negotiate (read pay) for = custom=20 > license terms. >=20 > In effect, SYL is hostile to commercial software developers but NOT to = persons=20 > who don't care about personal gain or organizations who will use, but = not=20 > modify, the software. >=20 > --------------------------------------------------- > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings: > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >