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



Betov wrote:
> >
> > 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.

And now, the RosAsm license is not *free* enough.

>
>
> > 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...

Please don't sully the reputation of the French by associating yourself
with them :-). Most Frenchmen do *not* believe as you do about
anything.

>
> > 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.


Yes, and the RosAsm license is going to stop all this :-)

> 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.

Which runs contrary to your licensing scheme. You don't give the
"collective one" the rights to do as they wish with your software
(including distributing it to others as they see fit). Instead, you
wish to maintain control over the many who use your software, by
insisting who can use it, who can not, who can modify it, and what they
can do with it when they modify it.

>
> 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.

Well, I can't say much about the "French Revolution", but Marxism
hasn't been faring too well recently, now has it? Apparently, Naziism
is doing real well, considering how many people around here you label
as Nazis. :-)
Cheers,
Randy Hyde

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: AdaCore ... the Next SCO?
    ... make anything without a GPL license. ... That is not Freedom. ... and GMGPL also have their place. ...
    (comp.lang.ada)
  • Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?
    ... GPL respects the freedom to distribute the program that you're ... there are locations where is a difference between a license and a contract and locations where a license is treated the same as a contract. ... You could make it available separately under a different or multiple licenses but as part of a combined work the GPL says its own terms must apply to all components of the work when any part needs acceptance of the GPL to copy/modify/distribute. ... But it doesn't matter that someone else has given you permission to copy a part under different terms if you've agreed not to. ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?
    ... you have to provide the whole with the permissions and the ... conditions set forth in the GPL, ... the modified BSD license, and its headers will say so, and there has ... choose for my own work is GPL-incompatible, my freedom to disseminate ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
    ... RMS can tell why he wrote the GPL. ... That's what the spirit of the GPL is all about. ... "intent" of the license, ... freedom and ability have two very different meanings. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Wanted: PHP public domain projects
    ... If you GPL your code, you won't make much money from your users either - ... since their license conditions forbid it. ... I don't think it has much to do with freedom. ...
    (comp.lang.php)