Re: Roaring Penguin's view

On 12 Jun 2002 14:01, Martin Wilck wrote:

> Check this out:
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/25659.html

It is mainly full of attacks on a paper.  He uses FUD to the extreme.
He throws little "hints" to scare you:  "Why does Microsoft... excuse
me, the AdTI... say that?"

Here he comes out completely mistaken:

"Suppose you derive a product from Microsoft Windows or some other
proprietary code. Then you are breaking all kinds of license agreements.
Furthermore, proprietary vendors would demand and get the rights to your
derived product, leaving you with nothing."

I could develop a proprietary product for Windows without "breaking all
kinds of license agreements".  He statement says you WILL be breaking
license agreements if you develop a proprietary product.

From the paper:

"However, the use of the GPL has the potential to radically alter a very
successful model for partnership, particularly when most large
commercial entities do not readily embrace the GPL. "

His response:

'Once again, the white paper is worried about "large commercial
entities." Well, some large commercial entities like HP/Compaq, IBM,
Dell and Sun are quite willing to use, produce and/or distribute GPL'd
software. To those large commercial entities who wish to stop GPL'd
software, I say:"Tough. Adapt or die."'

He did not disprove that statement.  He just showed a few examples and
used them to turn it into an attack.

I am sorry, but his rebuttal uses too much FUD for me to take it
seriously.  This is regardless of whether or not the paper he is
responding to is valid.

Sean
--------------
[email protected]