[Tfug] GPL Worthless?

[Richie Smit]

No. The FSF actively prosecutes GPL violations. No offense, but that  
"worthless" line is the fud that m$ likes to be spread. One of the  
values is that, given much GPL code is built on top of better known  
GPL code, and violation is often done through ignorance (Jeepy what  
now?) or laziness (fix later) and not malice, there end up being  
multiple aggrieved parties: strength in union and all that.

R.

On Sep 7, 2012, at 15:37, Bexley Hall <bexley401 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> To start, let me make it clear that I don't run an Linux variants
> and avoid GPL'd offerings as much as possible.
>
> Linux's (vs. any of the other free kernels & OS's) claim to fame
> seems to be its embracing of the GPL -- to virally allow software
> based on it to reproduce.
>
> Yet, looking at Linux based devices in the *market*, it seems that
> very few manufacturers seem to take those license terms seriously!
>
> Some make sources available (with a bit of digging).  Very few
> go beyond this to *encourage* modification of those sources
> (e.g., even something as simple as documenting the build process).
>
> Many *only* make the sources available -- with an attitude that
> borders on *contempt* for users looking for those sources!
> ["All we LEGALLY have to do is give you the sources.  Don't even
> *try* to ask for support!  ("Oh, but if you happen to find some
> really nasty bug in our implementation, we will begrudgingly
> accept a fully commented patch identifying the problem and its
> rememedy -- though we make no promises as to whether or not we'll
> credit you with that fix!")]
>
> And, I suspect the vast majority of the instances of GPL'd
> devices purchased with *no* compliance with GPL terms is the
> norm.  (just looking at the number of tablets running atop
> a linux kernel WITHOUT available sources should prove that
> point!)
>
> And, there seems to be no litigation in place to actively
> protect the terms of that license.
>
> So, can someone tell me what the *value* of a linux kernel
> is likely to be over any of the other non-GPL, FOSS kernels
> out there?
>
> [Sorry, I don't mean this to sound religious.  Rather, don't
> understand how something that isn't enforced/assured can have
> any practical *value* -- especially if that *thing* is what
> its advocates are promoting!]
>
> --don
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tucson Free Unix Group - tfug at tfug.org
> Subscription Options:
> http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug_tfug.org