Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[Josep Lluís Guallar Esteve <jlguallar AT maduixa.net>]

A Divendres 06 Juliol 2001 15:26, vàreu escriure:
> Michael S Czeiszperger wrote:
> > I think the larger intent is to create the impression that there's
> > something "dangerous" about open source in order to prevent their
> > customer base from getting involved *in any way* with any type of open
> > source software. By clouding the issue they can create confusion about
> > the whole issue so companies are afraid to have anything to do with
> > anything that's not Microsoft.

>       Clearly.  Look at the way that they lump Open Source code in with
> "viral" software of any kind.  It's as much a rhetorical device as a
> contract term.

Using the word "Viral" (several times, capitalized) in a software license.... 
with all those "Melissa", "Kournikova" ... virii still fresh in the memory... 
is missleading.

False or missleading advertising?

Are they trying to associate Linux-Users = Virus-makers?

>       Also, they're trying to avoid having open source mixed up with their
> proprietary code.  It might result in M$ code being construed as open
> source itself because of the open source component and the terms of
> whatever open source license applies.

You have Mozilla, L-GPL and others that do not require to produce GPL code if 
you use their code. And you can use GPL tools to produce propietary-code. 
There's not a restriction on that.

In fact, there are commercial applications build around GPL software. And 
some propietary code has already been written using GPL tools. This is 
completely legal and fair.

Remember, GPL-licensed programs only want to get GPL-licensed programs that 
use part or all of the lines of code of a code.


>       The "virus" to them is losing control of their intellectual property.

In 3 words: Pointy-Haired Bosses:

You know that, but managers, when asked tor ead the license before obtaining 
the product might^H^H^H^H^H  ***will*** associate  Linux AND Virus... so they 
will be more likely to block Linux usage in their departments. For fear of 
Viral activity in their systems... and losing of the company's intellectual 
property by using Linux.


> TaB

This is "bad behaviour" for a monopolistic company. This can let them to 
further troubles with the DoJ.




Salut,
Josep
-- 
Josep L. Guallar-Esteve
mailto:jlguallar AT maduixa.net