IP: Re: Microsoft Is Set to Be Top Foe of Free Code

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

I know I will get a bomb on this one djf

> Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 12:38:17 -0600
> To: farber () cis upenn edu, ip-sub-1 () majordomo pobox com
> From: Brett Glass <brett () lariat org>
>
>
> At 07:43 AM 5/3/2001, you wrote:
>
> > Microsoft Is Set to Be Top Foe of Free Code
> >
> > By JOHN MARKOFF
> >
> > Microsoft is preparing a broad campaign countering the movement to give 
> away and share software code.
> > Microsoft is preparing a broad campaign countering the movement to give 
> away and share software code, arguing that it potentially undermines the 
> intellectual property of countries and companies. At the same time, the 
> company is acknowledging that it is feeling pressure from the freely 
> shared alternatives to its commercial software.
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/03/technology/03SOFT.html
>
> After reading Mr. Markoff's commentary about Microsoft
> and open source, I have been left with the impression
> that he is condemning the ideas expressed by Microsoft
> because of -- no pun intended -- the source.
>
> Open source is clearly a public benefit. However, software
> licensed under the GNU General Public License, or GPL,
> is not truly open source. (The GPL violates the
> non-discrimination clause of the Open Software Definition --
> that's Clause 6 at
>
> http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.html
>
> -- because it allows use of code by end users but not
> by programmers. In fact, it is intended, specifically, to
> prevent programmers from being rewarded for their labors.)
>
> Microsoft is not arguing against the sharing or giving
> away of code, but rather against the GPL, which is intended
> to turn shared code into a weapon against the interests of
> legitimate software businesses and even the programmers who
> wrote it.
>
> Those who have read my writings know that I seldom side with
> Microsoft on any issue, but in this case it happens to be
> correct. Programmers are duped, by the misleading
> rhetoric in the GPL and on the FSF's Web site, into destroying
> their own markets and hurting their own prospects of reaping
> a just reward for their efforts. And the GPL has, indeed, caused
> businesses with worthy ideas and good technology to fail. Many of
> these might well have posed threats to Microsoft's dominance.
>
> Both the "Free" Software Foundation (which actually promotes
> software that is heavily encumbered by a complex license and
> is NOT "free") and Microsoft appear to have grandiose dreams
> of world domination. As a result, these rivals are capable of
> serving as watchdogs when it comes to one another's actions!
> When one debunks the other, it may actually be telling the
> truth, even if it is in the habit of not doing so in other
> circumstances. That's what's happening in this case.
>
> For more, see:
>
> http://davenet.userland.com/2000/09/15/whatIsOpenSource
>
> http://www.usermode.org/docs/tangledweb.html
>
> http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/opinions/3297/1/
>
> http://www.usermode.org/docs/wordstoavoid.html
>
> --Brett Glass
>
>
> At 07:43 AM 5/3/2001, you wrote:
>
> > Microsoft Is Set to Be Top Foe of Free Code
> >
> > By JOHN MARKOFF
> >
> > Microsoft is preparing a broad campaign countering the movement to give 
> away and share software code.
> > Microsoft is preparing a broad campaign countering the movement to give 
> away and share software code, arguing that it potentially undermines the 
> intellectual property of countries and companies. At the same time, the 
> company is acknowledging that it is feeling pressure from the freely 
> shared alternatives to its commercial software.
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/03/technology/03SOFT.html
> >
> >
> >
> > For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/