On Wednesday 16 January 2002 11:23 pm, Rob Weir wrote: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 05:13:11PM -0600, Adam Majer wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 12:13:55AM -0500, Alec wrote: > > > Joris, you want to switch to a proprietary platform just to get your > > > scanner to work?! I understand that Lindows will cost $99 (I'm not sure > > > what they are going to do about GPL in their code) Firstly, Lindows is > > > likely to be killed > > > > They _have_ to release their code free if they are selling their > > program... AFAiK, there is no problem if they sell GPL program > > but they have to allow access to source free. > > But which GPL programs will they be using? If it's a Linux > distribution that imitates Windows XXXX, then it probably just > contains the kernel, X and Wine. Of course, the kernel is GPL'd, but > I doubt they would need to make any modifications to it. X and Wine > are under BSD-ish licenses, so modifications to them do not have to be > released at all (witness the commercial X servers and Transgamings > proprietary WineX). > > > IMHO, if they don't, Free Software Foundation should sue them for > > breaking the license - heck, using the stupid Millinium Copyright > > Act!!! :-0 That would be nice for a change. > > The FSF can only get involved in cases where they have copyright; i.e. > GNU software. > > > BUT, on their site it says: > > > > " > > Lindows.com Licensing Information > > > > Lindows.com respects all applicable licensing and is proud to be > > a strong supporter of the Open Source community by helping to > > advance several Open Source initiatives. Coming soon to this page > > will be information, links and resources for obtaining source > > code and licensing information for any applicable software. " > > Again, only for copylefted software, BSD-ish stuff can stay > proprietary. >
the way things are with lindows right now, they might even end up changing the name to winux--that is if bill doesn't buy their silence for a couple of billion. i wouldn't hold my breath on the issue.
