Re: GPL Code calling non GPL code

[Alexander Terekhov]

Christopher Browne wrote:
> 
> Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw when David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> would 
> write:
> > Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:
> >
> >> John Hasler wrote: ...
> >>
> >> http://www.linuxworld.com/read/49064_4.htm
> >
> > Linuxworld, the publication that had its entire senior staff quit
> > recently because of a complete lack of responsible publishing.

Yeah, as if that book review article is in the same class as MOG's 
ramblings.

> >
> > And indeed, this article is quite in line with what one has come to
> > expect from Syscon (the publisher) in general.

GNUtian dak doesn't like http://www.stromian.com/Corner/Feb2005.html,
of course.

> 
> Just out of interest, is there _any_ truth to their claim that the FSF
> has "changed leadership"?  Or was that made up from whole cloth too?

Lessig aside for a moment,

http://www.fsf.org/news/new-executive-director.html

Oh, Ah, BTW, (quoting the article)

    So far the FSF has been scrupulous about avoiding court, relying 
    on quiet persuasion that moves over to loud public indignation and 
    pressure on the infringer from many quarters, and it has been 
    successful so far. 

Here's the scheme explained by FSF's own "GPL Compliance Engineer."

http://novalis.org/talks/lsm-talk-2004/slide-31.html

<quote>

Don't go to court

  FSF hasn't.
  Court is expensive
  Judges don't understand technology
    "Is static linking like two icons on one desktop?" 
        -Judge Saris, MySQL v. Nusphere oral argument 

</quote>

http://novalis.org/talks/lsm-talk-2004/slide-37.html

<quote>

Avoid publicity

  Don't talk about a violation publicly unless you have no choice
  Every violation I have mentioned was already mentioned on Slashdot
  I won't tell you about violations which aren't already public
  Publicity can be a useful threat
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

</quote>

How SCOish (apart from going to court).

http://www.softpanorama.org/People/Stallman/prophet.shtml
(Negative PR hammer of GPL as a source of income for FSF)

<quote>

Last year, the foundation alleged that OpenTV, a San Francisco company 
that ships a set-top box containing Linux, was violating the GPL. The 
drama took months to resolve and ended with OpenTV writing a check for 
$65,000 to the Free Software Foundation. "They paid us a very 
substantial payment for our time and trouble," Moglen says. 

</quote>

So much about FSF's ethics and morality.

regards,
alexander.