nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Oh, come on!  If you stopped whinning about sucky and evil GPL software
> and pulled yourself together to write down replacement code for said
> libs, you'd have by now a pretty large collection of good non-GPL
> software under your belt.  After all, they are pretty trivial and simple
> against your magnum opus.

Isn't that just the same point the FSF is claiming about commercial software,
just with a different "sign bit"?

The bad companies will assimilate your free software project until, with their
market power, they have "dried out" your project, so it only lives on as part
of their closed, commercial code - and other similar free projects likewise, so
the only alternatives left out there will be commercial products.

What's the difference here to a bad FSF that will assimilate *my* free software
project until, with *their* social power, they have "dried out" *my* project,
so it only lives on under *their* GPL'ed, not-for-commercial license - and
other similar free projects likewise, so the only alternatives left out there
will be GPL'ed products...?

Except that "FSF is ungood" would be a contradiction in itself, of couse...


I see people kind of measuring the one by the inches and the other by the
centimeters here, while basically it's the same: Influential organizations
trying to force their will on as much software as possible.

Post a reply to this message