iPhone restricts users, GPLv3 frees them

[LuKreme]

On 1-Jul-2007, at 14:24, Charlton Wilbur wrote:
> On Jul 1, 2007, at 4:15 PM, LuKreme wrote:
>> Yes, the BSD license 'existed'
>>
>> Of course, BSD was locked up under AT&T at the time, so the fact  
>> there was a BSD license was largely irrelevant.
>
> Other projects used the BSD license.

Uh huh.

>> Do you really think that we'd have the OSS and OSS licenses we  
>> have without the GPL?
>
> Yes.  And without Stallman and the GPL, we'd have a lot fewer  
> pissing contests about true software freedom.  Whether it would be  
> worth losing gcc and emacs is a tough call.

I dunno, I remember trying to get free software in the 80's and it  
was, while not impossible, it was nigh-impossible.  Everything  
started to change after GNU.

> Honestly, there needs to be a GPL-nutters mailing list.

You know, that';s not helping.  I'm not a GPL nutter.  I've never  
really cared one way or the other.  I know there are other licenses  
out there, but I also know that before GNU it was pretty hard to get  
code. Maybe you had a much better OSS experience.  If so, you were  
probably part of some institution that had resources as opposed to a  
neophyte unix dweeb who dreamed one day of being elevated to geek  
status.

I've never used Linux (GNU/Linux) seriously, have always preferred  
*BSD, and don't have anything invested in the argument other than the  
existence of the GPL made my life easier.

-- 
Can I borrow your underpants for 10 minutes?