Linux Creator Calls GPLv3 Authors 'Hypocrites' As Open Source Debate Turns Nasty
Linux creator Linus Torvalds said the authors of a new software license expected to be used by thousands of open source programmers are a bunch of hypocrites and likened them to religious fanatics -- the latest sign of a growing schism in the open source community between business-minded developers like Torvalds and free software purists.
In an online post, Torvalds slammed executives at the Free Software Foundation, likening their mind-set to that of "religious fanatics and totalitarian states."
The Free Software Foundation last month published a revised version of the General Public License, which governs the use of many open source programs.
Among several provisions viewed by many as anti-business is a GPLv3 rule forbidding commercial users of open source software from prohibiting customer modifications.
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
- 1418 reads
- PDF version
More in Tux Machines
- Highlights
- Front Page
- Latest Headlines
- Archive
- Recent comments
- All-Time Popular Stories
- Hot Topics
- New Members
digiKam 7.7.0 is releasedAfter three months of active maintenance and another bug triage, the digiKam team is proud to present version 7.7.0 of its open source digital photo manager. See below the list of most important features coming with this release. |
Dilution and Misuse of the "Linux" Brand
|
Samsung, Red Hat to Work on Linux Drivers for Future TechThe metaverse is expected to uproot system design as we know it, and Samsung is one of many hardware vendors re-imagining data center infrastructure in preparation for a parallel 3D world. Samsung is working on new memory technologies that provide faster bandwidth inside hardware for data to travel between CPUs, storage and other computing resources. The company also announced it was partnering with Red Hat to ensure these technologies have Linux compatibility. |
today's howtos
|
Linus vs. the GPLv3
In a very real sense, the GPLv3 asks people to do things that I personally would refuse to do. I put Linux on my kids computers, and I limit their ability to upgrade it. Do I have that legal right (I sure do, I’m their legal guardian), but the point is that this is not about “legality”, this is about “morality”. The GPLv3 doesn’t match what I think is morally where I want to be. I think it *is* ok to control peoples hardware. I do it myself.
More Here.
Wow! That is one the most
Wow! That is one the most poorly thought out analogies I've ever read. The GPLv3 does not limit what you can do in terms of restricting users (your children) on your own computers. You want to add DRM to GPLv3 code? Go right ahead and use them on your own computers, just don't redistribute it. Your analogy actually makes the point that you think it's fine for software providers to treat their customers/users like children and force their computers and devices work against their desires. That's a great vision you have there.
re: Wow! That is one the most
that was a quote from Linus Torvalds. See the link?
Aah... sorry. I didn't see
Aah... sorry. I didn't see the link. Needless to say, I think Linus is dead wrong on this whole issue.
re: Aah...
I should have made it apparent. Sorry.