[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-licensing
Subject:    Re: [freeqt] Re: FreeQt concerns
From:       Kevin Forge <forgeltd () usa ! net>
Date:       1998-04-06 21:59:55
[Download RAW message or body]

Alan Cox wrote:
> 
> > There is already a derivative in erly development.  FreeQT,
> > This debate is started because a few people have seen where the LGPL
> > would hurt Troll Tech.  This is not a good thing.
> 
> It's a fine thing. Troll Tech are a commerical organisation in a capitalist
> world. If a rival product free or otherwise sends them under then they were
> inferior and should have vanished. Thats the capitalist ethos.
>
Troll Tech has not done anything to hurt Linux, nor do they display an
intention to hurt Linux.  Therefore we should not attack them.  The only
difference between the GPL and LGPL on FreeQT is that the later would
hurt 
Troll Tech.  Hurting Troll is not only bad from a moral point ( they 
didn't attack us ), it's bad from a purely selfish me-first concept too.
Why ?  Linux users and programers command a great deal of respect in
the corporate world for the simple reason that we have never been
involved 
in the usual back stabbing and ass kissing that plagues business in
general.
Turning on KDE by allowing FreeQT to operate in the same environment 
( Commercial Software ) would only mean helping some other developers
who
don't give a damned about Linux while hurting Troll who have helped.
>
> [And yes I consider GPL and other free software to be as part of the
> capitalist world as everything else. Free software exists outside of the
> hobbyist/tech geek environment because it is provides facilities not
> otherwise available at an acceptable cost [not just price to buy]].
> 

> Alan

-- 
A computer without Windows 95 and Internet Explorer is likea piece of
chocolate cake without Catsup and Mustard.

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]