Microsoft, free software and the people

[Stan_Lite]

Well, for starters, plenty multi billion dollar software companies already write free software...

I also still don't see how you're proposing to legally re-license software which is under a license saying it can't be re-licensed. That's prima facie not legally possible. Case open, case closed.

You really are naive in the extreme if you think that a licence can't be revoked or circumvented if there's huge amounts of money to be made. Most of the 'civilised' world is built on people taking advantage of public demand.

We live in a free market economy which operates on the principle of supply and demand. If a company or individual considers there is enough of a demand for a product or service, they will find a way to make a profit from supplying the commodity in demand.

 

[Vonhelmet]

You really are naive in the extreme if you think that a licence can't be revoked or circumvented if there's huge amounts of money to be made. Most of the 'civilised' world is built on people taking advantage of public demand.

But why would the original writer of the code - the licence holder - choose to revoke his licence? He licensed it that way for a reason, and is unlikely to want to change that, and he's the only one who can legitimately revoke the license, unless the license itself can be shown to be illegal.

We live in a free market economy which operates on the principle of supply and demand. If a company or individual considers there is enough of a demand for a product or service, they will find a way to make a profit from supplying the commodity in demand.

Sure, and Linux may well someday be in significant demand, but that doesn't suddenly mean it will cease to be free (libre and gratis).

 

[Stan_Lite]

Who said anything about legitimately revoking the licence?

 

[Berserker]

Actually, you're both right.

The Linux kernel and the other Linux tools that have been GPL'd can never be subverted commercially. Some backwater country might give it a go, but they'd best not try selling their wares to the US. They'd get walked all over. Bear in mind that there are plenty of commercial organisations with an interest in Linux - Red Hat being the obvious one.

However, that still leaves UNIX, owned by Novell*. Unix was, and still is, a commercial operating system with commercial license terms. It was never subject to GPL.

And of course, someone with enough money or determination could write a Linux clone. That is, after all, exactly what Linus Torvalds did with the Linux kernel. Linux is openly declared as 'Unix-type' or 'Unix-like'. It isn't Unix, but it is an approximate facsimile.


* Note - not The SCO Group/Caldera - despite all their noise, lawsuits, and money-grabbing antics a judge decided they never actually owned the copyrights in UNIX. Oops. I guess copyright fraud (assuming that's what happened) really isn't big or clever. Seems they bankrupted themselves in the process though. I suspect there are plenty of people - myself included - who would like to see them fall on their swords (literally is acceptable).