Re: BK is *evil* corporate software [was Re: New BK License Problem?]

tom_gall
2002-10-07T18:49:59Z

On Sunday, October 6, 2002, at 05:11 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:

> Hi!
>
>> We're a business. We're a business which happens to be committed to
>> helping the kernel team because we think that the kernel is vital to
>> the world at large. Helping the kernel absolutely does not translate
>> to helping people who happen to be our competitors. By your own
>
> Stop lying. Your job is to make lots of money and you are using Linux
> as cheap advertising. You are trying to make people pay *you* to do
> kernel development (as it stands you want $5000 for any bk-using
> developer inside RedHat and SuSE).

O Please! As the person that started this thread this is way way way
way out there and quite frankly I find offensive.

I do NOT honestly think that Larry made the change to the license that
he did for the express purpose of milking some set of companies out of
$$$$. That's just dumb.

Like Larry and others who have made some rather good points over the
couple of days, I think we're all trying to find a way to reasonably
solve this that is is everyone's best interesting, including Larry's
company.

Granted it's a different kind of license, (IE Microsoft doesn't have a
clause in IE that says Netscape developers can't use IE) but hey, it's
Larry's company and he's perfectly in his rights to do so. It is
truely a good thing that Larry is allowing some set of us in the open
source community to use his product without costs. Personally I'm
willing to pay a reasonable license fee for it but it's gotta be
something that I can afford without getting my head torn off by my
wife. Of course the other solution is to adjust the license a bit so
folks like me who are just doing kernel work and not in competition
with Larry's company (no matter what others in my company are doing)
can use it.

That's what I hope for... maybe it'll come true.

Regards,

Tom