[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: GPL Liscensing on New Release: What Gives?
[Warning: this message is utterly without redeeming social or
monetary value, and would be off-topic about anywhere]
On 19 Jan 1999, Louis-Dominique Dubeau wrote:
> Again, a priori, no businessman is required to distribute anything.
> They have the choice not to distribute (under any form) GPLed
> software. If they are so much in love with some piece of GPLed code
> that they have to have it in their product, they can always
> reimplement it.
A voice of reason. D'accord! Tho' I certainly also appreciate the
comediac value of the suggestions that the GPL is a Communist Cult
Conspiracy to Contaminate the Precious Bodily Fluids[1] of the Capitalist
(formerly mis-named 'Free', but now more accurately called 'Free-Market')
World. After all, how dare anyone create or use a license that interferes
with the orderly process privatisation, monetarisation and productisation
of software (along with everything else in the known universe, including
your DNA) carried out by the Heroic Legions of entrepreneurs,
speculators, businessmen and huge multinational corporate superstates {the
ArchPriest-Militants[2] of the New World Order}. Subversive Luddite
Cyberpunk Savages!
Of course there is a remedy; once they have sequenced RMS's DNA, they
can assert ownership of him and by extension all GPL code, so there is
still hope for the sorely oppressed forces of Private Property; Fear Not,
Brave Stockholders! Greed and Money will triumph in the end; the
Inexorable March of History towards the well-ordered Sole Proprietorship
of Everything cannot be long delayed.
Now that I have had my bit of fun, I will return once again to
well-deserved obscurity. Someone may actually want to use this list for
discussions of OS-related matters.
-Jim http://as220.org/jb Software Libre O Morir!
[1]: (C) Stanley Kubrick
[2]: (C) Brian W. Aldiss
References: