Etaoin Shrdlu <shrdlu <at> unlimitedmail.org> writes:
> What you're saying here is not a secret, in fact these are all more or > less well-known facts. Yes, they probably did violate some open source > license. However, I don't see how having had closed source products > would have prevented them from doing what they wanted to do anyway. > And furthermore, what does all this have to do with "making money with > open source"? I just do not see the harm in letting a small (sub 1 million dollar company) build a product and not provide any details or what they did or how they did it. In the end, their success is more likely related to how slick their marketing campaign is or how well conceived the product/service is or how good their support is or some other twist. The GPL goes a long way to discouraging/preventing many of the serfs from ever trying.... IMHO. I believe that the GPL is the spawn of satan. I think the 'serfs' (the greater gentoo community) would be better off with a BSD style license related to Gentoo technologies and still use GPL software, as the individual chooses. After all, most of the BSD variants and derivatives (except those RTOS that large corporations use in some of their products) Still manage to use GPL software. Obviously, you think that GPL is a panacea. OK we agree to disagree. seeya James -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
