From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu From: "Thomas Bushnell, BSG" Message-ID: <87y9lfsdyq.fsf@becket.becket.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii References: <20011109130638-16803A.affeldt@harp.is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp>, <20011109100615.C66466@honk.eecs.harvard.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] drawterm / linux Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 10:33:41 +0000 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 1ee87fce-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 jkw@eecs.harvard.edu (William Josephson) writes: > And while we're at it, re: GPL nonsense > (1) it is arrogant to expect a company to > give away software in the first place. > open standards when they apply, but not code. If a company doesn't want to make the code free software, that's its business. I'm not saying Lucent is immoral or defective, just that one reason lots of people aren't using Plan 9 is because it comes encumbered with liberty-destroying provisions. > (2) don't go around telling people they haven't > done enough to make Plan 9 free when you don't > know what you're talking about. I'm saying that the Lucent lawyers haven't made it free. Whether they want to make it free or not is their business. But the fact that they haven't means that lots of people who would use Plan 9, don't. As for the patent problems, I still wonder whether Rob Pike has decided he did understand the applications after all, and if so, if he might tell the world exactly what is and is not covered by patents in Plan 9.