Re: HAY Betov, still no support for GPL or LINUX, WHY ????

Jonathan Bartlett <johnnyb@xxxxxxxxxx> écrivait news:42e79ae4$1
@news.tulsaconnect.com:

>> This means that, basically, it is the GPL, that is re-inforced
>> but additional consideration, that expressively "_discriminate_
>> against some persons and some groups of persons".
>
> So, you criticize others for not using GPL licenses, and then you
> yourself add discriminatory language to the GPL and pretend that you
are
> following it!?

Yes, i _do_. The GPL is _NOT_ restrictive enough, _NOT_
political enough, _NOT_ ethical enough. So, all we do
is to introduce an Extended-GPL license, as required,
and, as for us, this License _is_ comapatible with the
GPL, we release RosAsm under _both_ Licenses. You don't
like it? OK. Not a problem for me: _I_ like it.


> This is a complete mockery. At least people with non-free software and
> books can say they don't discriminate as to who uses their software and
> for what purpose. But you undermine any concept of freedom by
declaring
> yourself to be the arbiter of fair and unfair uses.
>
> I have seen this many times -- many who say they are out for "freedom
> for everyone" really mean they want the world to only work as they want
> it. This is the trait of the Marxists and of the French revolution.

Hehe... Frenchies are frenchies... We have payed to
learn for, say, 3,000 years, you know...

:)

> When all you are doing is liberating one group at the expense of
> another, all you are doing is creating another aristocracy, yours
> obviously being the one with Betov at the helm.

All the opposite. But i am afraid that the European concept
of freedom is something way over the head of the usual US
citizens, for which this word never ment anything but the
freedom to exploit the others, on the base of a demential
individualist ideology, that will go nowhere but, in case
of success, to a complete destruction of the biosphere.

There is no freedom out of the collective one, and, by
definition, this freedom include the banishment of the
happy few, having control on the many.

If you believe that "Marxism and of the French revolution"
are dead concepts, you simply understood nothing at the
past history, and this does not help at understanding the
actual history.

:)

Betov.

< http://rosasm.org >


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Industry choice
    ... all users should have the freedom to modify and/or distribute your code. ... They just see the GPL as an appropriate way to share their code. ... Can you point to closed-source licenses that allow using the code *at ...
    (comp.lang.python)
  • Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?
    ... replaced by the GPL when used in this way, that means the terms _become_ the ... Lots of licenses are compatible with the GPL. ... I have a beef with representing restrictions as freedom. ... So drop the misrepresentation and make the license enumerate all of the ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: bsd vs gpl
    ... prad wrote: ... 'freedom' without such a restriction can permit its own termination. ... the GPL is not anti-commercial or anti- ... These licenses aren't worth the paper they are printed on until tested in court. ...
    (freebsd-questions)
  • Re: whats the killer app for GNU/Linux systems?
    ... Both the GPL *and* commercial licenses are ultimately based on FUD. ... to restrict distribution. ... Now, how that is not freedom, I'm ...
    (Debian-User)
  • Re: HAY Betov, still no support for GPL or LINUX, WHY ????
    ... >> yourself add discriminatory language to the GPL and pretend that you ... > and, as for us, this License _is_ comapatible with the ... This is the trait of the Marxists and of the French revolution. ... > of freedom is something way over the head of the usual US ...
    (alt.lang.asm)