Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on April 23, 2002 09:17 PM
3: GPL-software: This has not given many high paying jobs to my knowledge. Infact it has and will continue to sink the IT-sector even lower than it is today.
You are so far out in the field you could be farming. This is the problem we face with the GPL, no one actually reads it. Instead, they listen to people they think have read it.
NO WHERE in the GPL does it prevent you from extending functionality for profit. What it does prevent you from doing is taking the work or developer "X", packaging it into MySoftWare and selling it. The way to (weakly) enforce it is to make you supply the source with it. The source of developer "X" AND the interface you created for it.
Put another way, if I write a book, you cannot take the book, replace the cover with your own and sell it as "your" book. Nor can you replace chapter 13 and call it mine (or yours for that matter). Write a parody, base on characters I created, give me credit, reference my work…to a certain extent all are fair use.
So why bother with the GPL if copyrights would do? Because it is near impossible to copyright binary code. If you do not supply the source how would I know? [Historically, you could reverse engineer it and figure out that MS was using Kerberos. Now we have the DMCA which say "no. no…" if you reverse engineer something you are breaking the law.]
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:Something wrong? -- Farmers
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 23, 2002 09:17 PMYou are so far out in the field you could be farming. This is the problem we face with the GPL, no one actually reads it. Instead, they listen to people they think have read it.
NO WHERE in the GPL does it prevent you from extending functionality for profit. What it does prevent you from doing is taking the work or developer "X", packaging it into MySoftWare and selling it. The way to (weakly) enforce it is to make you supply the source with it. The source of developer "X" AND the interface you created for it.
Put another way, if I write a book, you cannot take the book, replace the cover with your own and sell it as "your" book. Nor can you replace chapter 13 and call it mine (or yours for that matter). Write a parody, base on characters I created, give me credit, reference my work…to a certain extent all are fair use.
So why bother with the GPL if copyrights would do? Because it is near impossible to copyright binary code. If you do not supply the source how would I know? [Historically, you could reverse engineer it and figure out that MS was using Kerberos. Now we have the DMCA which say "no. no…" if you reverse engineer something you are breaking the law.]
#