DISQUS

How To Split An Atom: How To Irritate The Free Software Foundation

  • Andrew · 2 years ago
    "Obviously, what FSF is trying to do is force Apple into either licensing a large chunk of its software under GPL."

    Or?
  • Jonk : bargains for Australian · 2 years ago
    Gday

    It's a shame they can't protect themselves when Apple would absolutely crush anyone pulling the same stunt on them

    At best there'll be a small settlement at some point
  • Steve · 2 years ago
    @Andrew corrected.

    Yes, I imagine it will be something like that. More likely though, the entire mess will be buried by Apple's lawyers. This is the sort of thing they are paid for.
  • David · 2 years ago
    This would be a lot more interesting if there were some sort of EVIDENCE about this. I mean, how is this any different from when MS makes vague charges about Linux violating patents? If you have specific and provable facts, let's have them. Otherwise, tell the crazy man to shut up.
  • k · 2 years ago
    And by 'tell the crazy man to shut up', I hope you mean the author of this article above. Where is the evidence of Stallman or and FSF official making an unjustified -claim- about Apple's software? Somebody -posed a question- which has been taken out of context, and people are playing the telephone game, distorting it further with each retelling. Lets see some concrete evidence of -what Stallman actually said-.
  • Steve · 2 years ago
    The portion of K's argument that I will agree with is that it might be a telephone game, but quoting from Fake Steve Jobs',

    "According to our legal team the complaint was prepared by lawyers from the Software Freedom Law Center. Gist of the complaint is that crucial pieces of OS X and Safari were originally designed by Richard Stallman or designed by others who turned over their copyrights to Stallman"

    If this is false, then I guess I'm wrong. Chances are fairly good that the suit was filed, however. I'm open to proofs to the contrary.
  • k · 2 years ago
    Steve, so you don't agree with that part of my post where I imply you are a 'crazy man'??? I was responding to Dave's comments, and I apologise for expressing my frustration that way.

    I'd still like to know what, if anything, Stallman has actually contended. While he clearly has his own heavily biased view of reality, I believe he is amazingly careful when it comes to making statements of fact. His name does not appear on this page of the SFLC team.

    http://www.softwarefreedom.org/about/team/
  • Steve · 2 years ago
    Yea, I usually prefere not to be called "crazy" but no matter. :)

    The SFLC is the FSF's legal counsel, as quoted from their site in regards to GPL v 3.0,

    "...The global process will be overseen by the Free Software Foundation with support from its legal counsel the Software Freedom Law Centre (SFLC). Free Software Foundation Europe will be coordinating the European activities closely with both organisations and contributing to the global communication effort."

    Now whether the left hand knows what the right hand is doing, I do not venture to guess. However, I still believe that the SFLC is claiming that Stallman's works have been misused by Apple.

    Thanks for taking the time to comment, I love a bit of debate every now and then.
  • John · 1 year ago
    Sounds like to me that these GPL hippys just want a piece of Apple's pie. ie, $$$ and lots of it!