[GUFSC] Artigo da Forbes sobre a FSF

[Ricardo Grützmacher]

Gustavo Bouzon wrote:
> Meu, que sinistro o artigo que encontrei... destaque pra frase
> 
> "But the Free Software Foundation doesn't want royalties - it wants you
> to burn down your house, or at the very least share it with cloners.
> 
> http://www.forbes.com/2003/10/14/cz_dl_1014linksys.html



> Linux's Hit Men
> Daniel Lyons, 10.14.03, 7:00 AM ET
> 
> NEW YORK - In the world of "free" open source software, there is no
> greater villain than *SCO*, owner of the Unix operating system.
> 
> The Lindon, Utah, company has outraged Linux lovers by suing *IBM*,
> claiming IBM stole Unix code and put it into Linux. Some fear the
> lawsuit by SCO will impede the adoption of Linux.
> 
> But the spread of Linux could be hurt by another group--and ironically,
> it's the free-software proponents themselves.
> 
> For months, in secret, the Free Software Foundation, a Boston-based
> group that controls the licensing process for Linux and other "free"
> programs, has been making threats to *Cisco Systems* and *Broadcom*
> over a networking router that runs the Linux operating system.

A FSF não controla o licenciamento do Linux. O copyright do Linux é de 
Linus Torlvalds e não da FSF pois o kernel Linux não faz parte do 
projeto GNU (apesar de ser adotado pelo sistema GNU).

O que a FSF faz é tomar partido nas violações da GPL e outras licenças 
copyleft.

> But now there's a problem. The Linux software in the router is
> distributed under the GNU General Public License (GPL), which the Free
> Software Foundation created in 1991.

Não, a versão 2 da GPL foi lançada em 1991.

> For several months, officials from the Free Software Foundation have
> been quietly pushing Cisco and Broadcom for a resolution. According to
> Free Software Foundation Executive Director *Bradley Kuhn*, the
> foundation is demanding that Cisco and Broadcom either a) rip out all
> the Linux code in the router and use some other *operating system*, or b)
> make their code available to the entire world.

Linux não é sistema operacional, apenas um kernel...


> The dispute, which was leaked to an Internet message board, offers a
> rare peek into the dark side of the free software movement--a view that
> contrasts with the movement's usual public image of happy software
> proles linking arms and singing the "Internationale" while freely
> sharing the fruits of their code-writing labor.

Ridículo. O autor desta reportagem deve achar que o negócio da FSF é 
fazer o ``Linux'' (que para ele é um sistema opercional) um sucesso de 
mercado.

Na verdade a FSF está fazendo comprir o espírito de ``ou você colabora 
com a gente ou cai fora''. A comunidade de software livre não quer 
parasitas que se apropriem do código e não dêem nada em troca.


> The mySQL versus NuSphere squabble demonstrates another risk: These
> disputes might scare companies away from using open source software.

Ridículo. O que a empresa fez foi tornar proprietário um código GPL. 
Algo obviamente proibido.

> Joseph Alsop,
> chief executive of Progress, reckons the fiasco with mySQL cost his
> company $10 million in lost development and marketing work. Now he says
> he is cautious about working with GPL software. Instead, Progress uses
> an open source database program distributed under the less onerous
> Berkeley Software Distribution license.

Então, usando BSD license não tem problema...

> In some ways, these Free Software Foundation "enforcement actions" can
> be more dangerous than a typical copyright spat, because usually
> copyright holders seek money--say, royalties on the product that
> infringing companies are selling. But the Free Software Foundation
> doesn't want royalties--it wants you to burn down your house, or at the
> very least share it with cloners.

Esta matéria foi comprada. Sem comentários.

Até parece que esses caras que desenvolvem softwares proprietários não 
sabem ler uma nota de copyright. É patético eles dizerem que não é 
possível usar SL por temerem processo da FSF. Simplesmente uma pérola.

At.

grutz