Comments on: Momentumless Linux and the Death of Open Source – A Developer’s Response http://www.theirishpenguin.com/2007/07/15/momentumless-linux-and-the-death-of-open-source-a-developers-response/ Watching Open Source unfold across Ireland Sun, 21 Feb 2010 01:12:58 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Jakob http://www.theirishpenguin.com/2007/07/15/momentumless-linux-and-the-death-of-open-source-a-developers-response/comment-page-1/#comment-46 Jakob Sun, 22 Jul 2007 17:44:07 +0000 http://www.theirishpenguin.com/2007/07/15/momentumless-linux-and-the-death-of-open-source-a-developers-response/#comment-46 This is exactly what I expected to find out after reading the title s Response. Thanks for informative article This is exactly what I expected to find out after reading the title s Response. Thanks for informative article

]]> By: The pen is mightier than the FUD - Lone Wolves - Web, game, and open source development http://www.theirishpenguin.com/2007/07/15/momentumless-linux-and-the-death-of-open-source-a-developers-response/comment-page-1/#comment-44 The pen is mightier than the FUD - Lone Wolves - Web, game, and open source development Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:06:38 +0000 http://www.theirishpenguin.com/2007/07/15/momentumless-linux-and-the-death-of-open-source-a-developers-response/#comment-44 [...] then he acts surprised if the people he attacks react and rebut his piece. In his follow-up called “Decline of Open Source Follow-Up: FUD [...] [...] then he acts surprised if the people he attacks react and rebut his piece. In his follow-up called “Decline of Open Source Follow-Up: FUD [...]

]]> By: Richard Stallman http://www.theirishpenguin.com/2007/07/15/momentumless-linux-and-the-death-of-open-source-a-developers-response/comment-page-1/#comment-43 Richard Stallman Thu, 19 Jul 2007 10:06:25 +0000 http://www.theirishpenguin.com/2007/07/15/momentumless-linux-and-the-death-of-open-source-a-developers-response/#comment-43 If GPL2 has worked so well for so long, why do we need GPL3? Because it's a different world than it was back in 1989, when GPL1 was released. Back then, there was no Linux and no giant worldwide community of free and open source software. Just Richard Stallman trying to protect his own work and the work of other developers. With GPL3, Mr. Stallman and the Free Software Foundation (FSF) are cleaning up the language, closing loopholes, and trying to address two primary concerns: "Tivoization" and patent threats. This sets a potentially dangerous precedent — the vendor could release hardware that uses GPL kernel drivers but only binaries signed with the secret key work on the device. Another, perhaps more serious problem is software patents. It's pretty much undisputed that the patent system in the United States is broken, at least as far as software patents are concerned, and all manner of patents are being granted that should never see the light of day. Unfortunately, it is expensive to fight bogus patents, so we're stuck in a strange limbo where every little trivial line of code is probably a patent violation, and there is much looking-the-other-way among patent holders. In this case, publishing the source code for drivers is useless because modified drivers won't work. Regards, Richard. If GPL2 has worked so well for so long, why do we need GPL3? Because it’s a different world than it was back in 1989, when GPL1 was released. Back then, there was no Linux and no giant worldwide community of free and open source software. Just Richard Stallman trying to protect his own work and the work of other developers. With GPL3, Mr. Stallman and the Free Software Foundation (FSF) are cleaning up the language, closing loopholes, and trying to address two primary concerns: “Tivoization” and patent threats.

This sets a potentially dangerous precedent — the vendor could release hardware that uses GPL kernel drivers but only binaries signed with the secret key work on the device.

Another, perhaps more serious problem is software patents. It’s pretty much undisputed that the patent system in the United States is broken, at least as far as software patents are concerned, and all manner of patents are being granted that should never see the light of day. Unfortunately, it is expensive to fight bogus patents, so we’re stuck in a strange limbo where every little trivial line of code is probably a patent violation, and there is much looking-the-other-way among patent holders. In this case, publishing the source code for drivers is useless because modified drivers won’t work.

Regards,

Richard.

]]> By: theirishpenguin http://www.theirishpenguin.com/2007/07/15/momentumless-linux-and-the-death-of-open-source-a-developers-response/comment-page-1/#comment-41 theirishpenguin Sun, 15 Jul 2007 06:21:02 +0000 http://www.theirishpenguin.com/2007/07/15/momentumless-linux-and-the-death-of-open-source-a-developers-response/#comment-41 Just a quick update. Groklaw has also covered the David DeJean article at the following link http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070713192403106 Thanks to schestowitz on Digg for that one. Just a quick update. Groklaw has also covered the David DeJean article at the following link http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070713192403106

Thanks to schestowitz on Digg for that one.

]]> By: Kazam http://www.theirishpenguin.com/2007/07/15/momentumless-linux-and-the-death-of-open-source-a-developers-response/comment-page-1/#comment-40 Kazam Sat, 14 Jul 2007 14:38:05 +0000 http://www.theirishpenguin.com/2007/07/15/momentumless-linux-and-the-death-of-open-source-a-developers-response/#comment-40 Really interesting article. Really interesting article.

]]>