The bad FSF

simo simo.sorce at xsec.it
Thu May 29 19:05:17 UTC 2008


On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 20:56 +0200, Guido Arnold wrote:
> Hello,
> I stumbled across this odd article: "All OSS Developers Are Equal, But
> Some OSS Developers Are More Equal Than Others!" [1] where the FSF is
> criticized for being unfair to software developers and failed to close
> the "ASP Loophole".
> 
> For the authors of this article, the Affero GPL does not fix the
> problem, because "GPL developers won't use it". Well, if so, why
> should they switch to any other licence that addresses the problem?
> 
> And the accusation of unfairness goes in the same direction. They
> blame the FSF to aggressively sue software developers who don't
> provide the source code in their distribution, but don't sue google
> for benefiting from Free Software without showing their sources.
> 
> I don't really see what they want to tell me beside that the FSF is
> just a bunch of "extremists" who "deny the value of intellectual
> property rights."
> 
> I am contemplating to write them, but it's probably not worth it. What
> do you think?
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.metrocorpcounsel.com/current.php?artType=view&artMonth=May&artYear=2008&EntryNo=8208

This is just junk, ´╗┐this is half hate speech, half straw man attack.
The GPLv3 is compatible with Affero, (GPL v2 was not), so GPLv3 actually
GOES into the direction of allowing people to close the ASP loophole,
but it primarily give CHOICE to do so.
The reason why Affero GPLv3 and GPLv3 are not one and the same license
is because the FSF *listened* to the committees and interested parties,
and most were not in favor of *forcibly* closing the so called ASP
loophole.

Junk really not worth considering imo.

Simo.




More information about the Discussion mailing list