Innovation = Freedom: Eben Moglen

I have long touted the four freedoms of Free Software as the best way to do IT and being good for the economy, enabling everyone to participate. Eben Moglen, guru of Software Freedom Law Center, gave a speech along the same lines but much more eloquently, tying together Software Freedom, political freedom, the economy and innovation. His thesis is that stifling access to code and hardware through various means of lock-down/in stifles innovation. I have seen that up close and personally in schools where a school that could do little more than browse and write/print documents became empowered to actually put the LAN to work connecting all the PCs in the school into one big super-computer for creating, storing, modifying and presenting information. The difference, with the same level of expenditure is mind-boggling. Visitors to schools I have set up this way are amazed at what PCs running Free Software can do.

Check out a snippet
“All of that innovation comes from the simple process of letting the kids play and getting out of the way. Which, as you are aware, we are working as hard as we can to prevent, now, completely. Increasingly, around the world, the actual computing artifacts of daily life for individual human beings are being locked so you can’t hack them. The individual computing laboratory in every 12-year-old’s pocket is being locked down. If you prevent people from hacking on what they own themselves, you will destroy the engine of innovation from which everybody is profiting. The goal of the network operators is to attach every young human being to a proprietary network platform with closed terminal equipment that she can’t learn from, can’t study, can’t understand, can’t whet her teeth on, can’t do anything with except send text messages that cost a million times more than they ought to.” or, better yet, experience the presentation for yourself: Innovation Under Austerity: Eben Moglen's call to arms from the Freedom to Connect conference – Boing Boing.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology. Bookmark the permalink.

45 Responses to Innovation = Freedom: Eben Moglen

  1. M$ and that other OS are not people, human beings with feelings… They are a business which flaunts laws and bullies people and a deeply flawed product foisted on millions of people, truly a crime against humanity.

    If M$ were some small business struggling to survive one might understand why they are tempted to break rules for short-term survival but M$ has been around decades and still has that primitive instinct that their survival depends on murdering innocents (figuratively, as in anti-competitive behaviour). Running in a billion PCs and affecting the lives of many more the cost of M$’s existence is too huge to contemplate. I think that’s why governments have been so tolerant. They are still in denial that guys with nice smiles and suits/sweaters can be so evil.

  2. “As you well know, I am not an executive type. I welcome discussion and try to ignore the name-calling.”

    You ignore the name calling? You’re the one perpetuating this juvenile behaviour in the first place whenever you say “M$”, “the other OS” and telling people to “go XXXX yourself”. You HAVE to look the other way because you’re just as immature and indulgent.

    Learn to set an example so that things can be kept civil.

  3. oldman says:

    “You’re too frazzled carry on with any basic communication. See you next time.”

    Nice head games… To bad they didn’t work.

    Oh there is also a very simple solution to having to deal with me. Don’t Post! 😉

  4. kozmcrae says:

    @ldman wrote:

    “And you are advocating the slavery of software developers by removing their right to license their wares on their terms, Eh MR. pure.”

    “To small to be of consequence? and you know this how? have you ever created anything Mr. K or do you just mooch on other peoples hard work?”

    There is a very simple solution to your objections to the GPL. Don’t use it. If a developer feels that the terms of the GPL are too onerous, then just don’t use the code. Go elsewhere. Problem solved.

    And as far as me being a Communist/Fascist, that would be similar to calling me a Republican/Democrat. The rest of your diatribe makes about as much sense too. You’re too frazzled carry on with any basic communication. See you next time.

  5. oldman wrote, “Robert Pogson. I have attempted to keep a civil tongue with this gentleman, but it would seem that he is not going to stop.

    How do you propose that we deal with this.?”

    As you well know, I am not an executive type. I welcome discussion and try to ignore the name-calling. People are welcome to comment here if they have something to add. All the ad hominem attacks are a total waste of time. I might close comments completely if this continues much longer. The days are long and hot and I have no energy to be a baby-sitter. Today, I watered vegetables and grass, tallied my successful plantings and failures, had the car serviced at great expense and I have no energy left for arguments between children.

  6. oldman wrote, “I don not understand why you have no problem agreeing to the terms of the GPL License”.

    The GPL is completely fair. People to whom you distribute the code have the same rights as you. The GPL is perfect for sharing code. The GPL gives rights, rather than taking them away. That makes it a tiny burden compared to all the hoops M$ and its “partners” ask people to jump. M$’s EULA is more about stifling competition than respecting rights. For example, why is there a restriction on a certain number of network connections? That has nothing to do with M$’s rights to its software and everything to do with manipulating users of the software.

  7. oldman says:

    “No @ldman, you are not Mr. High and Mighty. You are not trying to protect anyone’s intellect property. You said the business/commercial people were getting away with taking the hard work of FLOSS and “laughing all the way to the bank” with it, you SOB.”

    SOB?

    YOU are SOB here sir. YOU the one who came to this site with the express purpose of attacking me. You are the one who REFUSES to consider that there might be another side of the story. When you are told of another side of the story, you dismiss it out of hand with your FOSS wins spiel. You have made this a personal vendetta you little pr-ck!

    “I am not a moocher. I am doing exactly what one should do with the code. I am enjoying the freedom of using it. I enjoy the freedom of looking at the product of that code be it a text file of my own making or the output of a log file. And, once in a great while, I’ll send in a bug report.”

    Translation: I am a freeloader who revels in getting something for nothing. Its the same thing sir!

    “The two are polar opposites @ldman. No one is shoving FLOSS down anyone’s throat. It only seems that way because now FLOSS is just being considered. ”

    They are not polar opposites sir. One need only look at the soviet union mr. moocher. There were plenty of communists cum fascists like you who made the lives of those who didnt tow the party line misrable as they forced conformance.

    “You are advocating the abuse of the hard work of others.”

    And you are advocating the slavery of software developers by removing their right to license their wares on their terms, Eh MR. pure.

    “The balance of man hours is far, far and away in favor of that covered by the GPL. The tiny little bit added by the commercial/proprietary interest is too small to be of any consequence. Yet it’s held by you to be more important than the code of others.”

    To small to be of consequence? and you know this how? have you ever created anything Mr. K or do you just mooch on other peoples hard work?

    That “little bit” as you call it is often the difference between performing a task on time and having to sort through th vast redundant much of the time crap pile that is FLOSS to find that tool that gets that job done. it is te difference between working with that “wonderful” piece of FOSS attempting to get it to read in without choking the same midi file that the commercial package that I am using has had no problem reading for the past 10 years of versions!

    But of course that means nothing to a little low life like you who revekls in the fact that he gets something for nothing!

    “I have considered your words @ldman. You have an unnatural hatred of all things FLOSS. That’s not a healthy thing to have in this changing world.”

    Sir I actually do quite nicely in a world in which FOSS and commercial software coexist peacefully side by side. If I have a hatred of anything it is little fascistic people like you who would have the world in only one flavor of software – that of FOSS.

    Robert Pogson. I have attempted to keep a civil tongue with this gentleman, but it would seem that he is not going to stop.

    How do you propose that we deal with this.?

  8. oldman says:

    “Information is essentially free, oldman. ”

    No Robert Pogson, this is not information. This is the the work of a software creator to produce a unique expression of function and feature. It is NOT free, has never BEEN free and never will be free unless the creator volunteers it to be.

    None of your semanti8c nonsense will change this fact, Nore will it change the fact that the contaract law that backs up those licenses and the GPL BTW is recognized the world over and accepted as one of the foundations of international commerce.

    As far as your objections to microsoft term of its LICENSE are concerned. I don not understand why you have no problem agreeing to the terms of the GPL License, but you have virulent objections to Microsoft enforcing their own terms for licensing their product.

    IMHO The only valid answer in the end that you have is the one that you have taken. You refuse to come to terms with microsoft, eschew their software offerings and go with the terms of the license that you feel that you can live with, that of FOSS and the GPL.

    And that is fine with me.

    But all else including your specious characterizations of microsoft in particular and commercial software in general remain as they have always been unadulterated selfish bushwah.

  9. kozmcrae says:

    No @ldman, you are not Mr. High and Mighty. You are not trying to protect anyone’s intellect property. You said the business/commercial people were getting away with taking the hard work of FLOSS and “laughing all the way to the bank” with it, you SOB.

    The GPL is for the benefit for all. The moochers are the one’s who try to grab all the code for themselves. The balance of man hours is far, far and away in favor of that covered by the GPL. The tiny little bit added by the commercial/proprietary interest is too small to be of any consequence. Yet it’s held by you to be more important than the code of others.

    I am not a moocher. I am doing exactly what one should do with the code. I am enjoying the freedom of using it. I enjoy the freedom of looking at the product of that code be it a text file of my own making or the output of a log file. And, once in a great while, I’ll send in a bug report.

    “Reality can be nasty Mr. K deal with it!” He said.

    But you’re just nasty @ldman and it’s not just to me. You are nasty to a whole part of society. You are advocating the abuse of the hard work of others. That is not just nasty, it’s anti-social.

    You were very amused at the thought of commercial interests taking code from FLOSS and using it as an advantage against FLOSS interests and doing it without any contribution of their own. Laughing all the way to the bank you called it. You thought that was very funny. You are a sick bastard @ldman.

    I love your second to last paragraph. After basically calling me a communist throughout most of your diatribe, you end up calling me a fascist. The two are polar opposites @ldman. No one is shoving FLOSS down anyone’s throat. It only seems that way because now FLOSS is just being considered.

    I have considered your words @ldman. You have an unnatural hatred of all things FLOSS. That’s not a healthy thing to have in this changing world.

  10. oldman wrote, “I believe that people should be able to protect their intellectual property from those who have no respect for it and who have rigged the game accordingly.”

    Information is essentially free, oldman. A grandfather cannot lock up a story he has told, or a lesson taught. What we know must be shared to have any value. Charging money, etc. per copy, lesson, etc. is legitimate. Trying to prevent people from using what they know is not. The concept of copyright was developed at a time when it was costly and time-consuming to produce copies of anything. Now, it costs 1 cent to copy almost any information and infinite copyright is unconscionable. For example, it is just fine for M$ to offer copies of its OS for $X but it is unconscionable for them to restrict use to 10 connections, XMB or CPUs, to exclude competition in the market etc. The courts presently allow M$’s abuse but eventually they will correct the injustices M$ and “partners” have imposed on the world. I would have little objection to M$ abusing its customers if they had a choice on retail shelves. They could then run to GNU/Linux and shun the abuser but they cannot and governments should be ashamed for allowing this distortion of the market to continue.

  11. oldman says:

    “Look at yourself @ldman. Listen to the tone of what you wrote. You are nasty.”

    Reality can be nasty Mr. K deal with it!

    “It looks to me as though you wish to scare any young hackers away from FLOSS. It won’t work @ldman. They are smarter than you. They see right through BS.”

    No such thing sir. and its not BS either just because you think it is. The young will always do what they will because its cool. It os only later thwne they have bills and jobs and they get tired of working for moochers like you that they wise up and start working for their own benefit.

    “So, I see from your words that it’s the GPL that really pisses you off. So you believe all the 13 million-plus lines of Linux kernel code should just be there for the taking? All that hard work of others locked up for no one else to see or benefit from? Just so someone can add a few thousand line of their own code and then call all those millions of lines of code their own? ”

    Dont put words in my mouth sir. I said no such thing. I DID outline the things that commercial software vendors who offer products for license on linux do to protect the intellectual property that They have expended man centuries of effort on. I brought this to your attention because it is reality – IMHO Linux has become a “Success” outside the the community only BECAUSE the major software vendors feel that they can product their work and profit. Perhaps I stated it in a blunt manner, but reality can be very nasty.

    Just like the reality Mr. FOSS bigot that the core of you FOSS dominated network is actually made up of clised source proprietary goods from the likes of cisco and juniper.

    “You are a selfish bastard @ldman. You believe if someone can take something and get away with it, they should.”

    No I believe that people should be able to protect their intellectual property from those who have no respect for it and who have rigged the game accordingly. I absolutely respect the license that protects the Kernel code from those who would change something cosmetic and then resell it as their own. At the same time I reserve the right not to contribute line one of code it I am n0ot to be compensated for my work.

    I do not run a charity.

    Yet you and Pog seem to think that those who choose to sell licenses to their software have no right to do so because all they are doing is “selling the right to copy” .

    Can you say hypocrite.

    “The GPL is for the benefit of all, not for the benefit of a few. You have identified yourself as the selfish few. ”

    All because I won’t join the commune eh, Mr. Moocher.

    No I have identified myself as someone who observer a reality that you don’t like and don’t want to acknowledge.

    “You are the kind of person that makes the world a more difficult place to live in, not a better place. It’s that simple. It’s that clear. You advocate for those who would take away from others without compensation. ”

    And you have proven yourself the kind of smug little facist that masquerades as a lover of freedom as he cheers those having his favored platform and software shoved down their throats of the unwilling by government fiat.

    Consider my words.

  12. kozmcrae says:

    @ldman wrote:

    “Yes Mr. K. Thats EXACTLY what it is – plumbing and nothing more….”

    Look at yourself @ldman. Listen to the tone of what you wrote. You are nasty.

    I looks to me as though you wish to scare any young hackers away from FLOSS. It won’t work @ldman. They are smarter than you. They see right through BS.

    So, I see from your words that it’s the GPL that really pisses you off. So you believe all the 13 million-plus lines of Linux kernel code should just be there for the taking? All that hard work of others locked up for no one else to see or benefit from? Just so someone can add a few thousand line of their own code and then call all those millions of lines of code their own? You are a selfish bastard @ldman. You believe if someone can take something and get away with it, they should.

    The GPL is for the benefit of all, not for the benefit of a few. You have identified yourself as the selfish few. You are the kind of person that makes the world a more difficult place to live in, not a better place. It’s that simple. It’s that clear. You advocate for those who would take away from others without compensation. It’s the business of humanity @ldman. And like you say, business is business.

  13. oldman says:

    ““Folly also contains state-of-the-art work-alikes for two common C++ standard library utilities (std::string and std::vector), which may be useful for anyone who does not have access or a license to a quality C++ standard library, or who might want to use those classes in an embedded setting where they are avoiding most of the rest of the standard library for code size reasons,” he said.”

    Yes Mr. K. Thats EXACTLY what it is – plumbing and nothing more. Furthermore we dont know how it will be released. IF it is released under LGPL it may have som e use but if it is GPL’s its value goes to nill because of the taint of GPL. Only fgeeks and refuseniks who think that the efforts of software development have no value will use it for creating their Ersatz FOSS.

  14. oldman says:

    “There’s no advantage whatsoever to everyone writing their own software and keeping it hidden. That just causes duplication of effort and waste.”

    There is to the creator of the software if their software is good enough to attract a market they will benefit fully from their creative efforts, and they will be able to improve that software over time.

    The benefit is aleo for the user, who can benefit from the competition between vendors for the users money. That user gets more function and feature.

    The only people who don’t benefit are those who want something for nothing like yourself Pog.

  15. kozmcrae says:

    Here’s some more of that “plumbing”.

    http://venturebeat.com/2012/06/02/facebook-folly/

  16. oldman wrote, “If you take a close look at what is being contributed , you will note that much of it is little more than improvements to “the plumbing” of open source or to those components that allow the their own closed proprietary components to work on top of open source efficiently.”

    Well, we all need plumbing… Businesses also contribute in a big way to software they use internally and by sharing the load, reduce their cost of IT. LibreOffice, PHP, Linux etc. are examples. There’s no advantage whatsoever to everyone writing their own software and keeping it hidden. That just causes duplication of effort and waste.

  17. oldman says:

    “Yet, you conveniently forget it all and pretend that everyone is “using” open source and all the hard work of the “basement dwelling dreamers” for their own nefarious ideals. How many times have you pulled this stunt or one like it? Dozens of times.”

    I dont conveniently forget anything sir, nor do i “Pull” anything. Unlike yourself I see the reality of the way that business of software is contributing to open source. If you take a close look at what is being contributed , you will note that much of it is little more than improvements to “the plumbing” of open source or to those components that allow the their own closed proprietary components to work on top of open source efficiently.

    If you do not like what I and others who say the same thing are saying. Tough sh-t.

    Again, have you looked into implementing tripwire on your personal workstation.?

  18. kozmcrae says:

    Over seventy percent of the contributions to the Linux kernel are made by commercial interests @ldman. Other projects vary but all the major ones include significant commercial involvement. I doubt if they are laughing all the way to the bank. Maybe smiling at the extra profit they are making from using open source rather than proprietary source. I suspect being involved in software important to your bottom line and having some control in its development is the real payoff for a company’s involvement in an open source project. The fact that other companies benefit from it is just collateral goodwill.

    And now for the point of this comment. You know all this @ldman. Yet, you conveniently forget it all and pretend that everyone is “using” open source and all the hard work of the “basement dwelling dreamers” for their own nefarious ideals. How many times have you pulled this stunt or one like it? Dozens of times.

  19. oldman wrote, “these people are using the community software and laughing all the way to the bank.”

    Have you read the GPL, oldman? Where is it written that one can only run the software as a charity? Making money is one of several legitimate uses of software, GPL or not. The GPL is not about the cost of things but the freedom to do things, including making money. Businesses that plan to stay in business will see value in contributing to FLOSS. It’s the right way to do IT. Buying licences for some software that can disappear at the whim of some technocrat wanting to sell some newer product is not.

    Guy goes into a hardware store:
    Guy “I want to buy that screwdriver and a licence to use it.”

    Clerk “Do you want the single-use licence, the annual licence, or the perpetual licence with the right to upgrade?”

    Guy “What are the prices?”

    Clerk “Screwdriver, $5. Single-use licence, $2. Annual licence, $20. Perpetual licence, $40 per annum.”

    Isn’t that silly? That’s what M$ has you doing, oldman, paying to use what you already “own”.

  20. oldman says:

    “I have as much respect for you that you have for FLOSS and I treat you the same too.”

    Robert Pogson manages to keep a civil tongue while debating, and I expect you to do so as well or I will respond in kind.

    We can turn this into a cursing fest, or we can try to set ideology aside and understand where each other is coming from.

    “Of course it is. You were completely off base with that money remark regarding FLOSS. And you gave up trying to find a case where the GPL lost. ”

    Let go back a bit to your comment

    “I’m not sure what you mean by special sauce but the GPL has not lost at case yet.”

    Thats because in many cases its been used against itself as follows:

    Major commercial vendors like Oracle and VMWare keep the truly valuable parts of their IP to themselves by building on top of LGPL libraries.

    Other vendors build their commercial closed source applications on frameworks that allow them to do so. All of the android based applications arfe an example of this.

    Other vendors build their applications as extensible frameworks. They open source the framework and possible just enough functional modules to make their offerings useful to the community, but the really valuable stuff with the special sauce is kept clolsed source and offered as the “Enterprise” edition.

    And then there are those who make available the command line version of their product while selling the GUI based “easy to use/administer” commercial version – Again all closed source.

    Oh, and BTW – these same companies will occasionally throw a piece of meat in the form of “useful” code to the community, but if you look carefully it will only be what is absolutely needed to enhance the companies bottom line.

    Of course you will sat that this the way that its “supposed” to work, but as far as I am concerned you are kidding yourself – these people are using the community software and laughing all the way to the bank.

    That was my point.

  21. kozmcrae says:

    @ldman wrote:

    “This was unnecessary to making your point sir. I think you need to clean up your mouth if you expect a civil answer. I am tired of your ignorance.”

    That’s the best you could come up with? Of course it is. You were completely off base with that money remark regarding FLOSS. And you gave up trying to find a case where the GPL lost.

    Nothing wrong with asking Robert to “take note” of lack of civility towards you. Nothing new there either though. I have as much respect for you that you have for FLOSS and I treat you the same too.

  22. oldman says:

    Kozmacrap cursed:

    “@ldman you asshole!”

    This was unnecessary to making your point sir. I think you need to clean up your mouth if you expect a civil answer. I am tired of your ignorance.

    Try being more civil and I will give you a civil answer. Continue being uncivil to me and you will get uncivility back AS your answer, and nothing else!

    Pog, take note please.

  23. kozmcrae says:

    @ldman wrote:

    “The truth is Linux and FOSS are used and abused by commercial entitles for their own purposes to make money.”

    @ldman you asshole! Isn’t that the point?! It’s not abuse to make money from FLOSS.

    I’m not sure what you mean by special sauce but the GPL has not lost at case yet. Everyone accused of violating the GPL has been brought in to compliance. Everyone.

  24. oldman says:

    “FLOSS has totally upset the balance of power and forever changed the IT landscape.”

    Only to the extent that it is useful or can be made useful by the commercial interests that really run things. The socialistic crap that you ascribe to is left at the door whenever possible.

    The truth is Linux and FOSS are used and abused by commercial entitles for their own purposes to make money. The major commercial entities all have lawyers and most of whom have figured out how to monetize all of the raw crap that the FOSS community produces while keeping their special sauce for themselves to sell.

    You can celebrate your “victories” but You cant circumvent the market.

  25. kozmcrae says:

    Clarence wrote:

    “As a practical matter, Linux does not need any sort of license to support its goals. It is free to use once obtained and you can modify it yourself, if you feel like doing that and have any competency to do so, but only changes submitted back to Linus himself ever get into the next version of the product.”

    Ah, Clarence you dimwit, that basically *is* the license.

    Clarence further wrote:

    “So what is the real effect of FLOSS? I don’t think that it has any.”

    Then you don’t need to be here. No need to comment on the “effect” of FLOSS since, in your opinion, there isn’t any. Of course that is an absurd statement. FLOSS has totally upset the balance of power and forever changed the IT landscape. I point to the comments on these pages as just one example of proof of that. In your own steady stream of denial, grudging acceptance of truth when no other venue is open and my favorite, silence when you just have to choose your battles. You simply can’t defend every FLOSS victory against your proprietary interests.

  26. kozmcrae says:

    oiaohm wrote:

    “I guess kozmcrae you did not know about the annual reports.”

    I was just too lazy to look it up. Thank you for your careful research. It’s a completely different impact than simply “more than a 1,000”. It does make a big difference. I made a copy of it and a bookmark and put it in my Resource section so in the future I will have quick access to it. Thanks again.

  27. oldman says:

    “So, they are all FLOSS whether Clarence Moon accepts that to be the case.”

    No they are FOSS and still not GPL.

    and IMHO that’s what counts.

  28. Clarence Moon wrote, “LAMP stack, nothing really is in the FLOSS category.”

    • Linux – GPL v 2 and anyone can contribute. Many thousands do.
    • Apache – ASL – FLOSS with no requirement to divulge modification.
    • MySQL – according to Debian:“Copyright:

      According to the file “COPYING” all parts of this package are licenced
      under the terms of the GNU GPL Version 2 of which a copy is available
      in /usr/share/common-licenses.

      To allow free software with other licences than the GPL to link against the shared library, special terms for “derived works” are defined in the file “EXCEPTIONS-CLIENT” which is quoted below.

      More information can be found on http://www.mysql.com/company/legal/licensing/

    • PHP – “Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, is permitted provided that the following conditions are met:

      1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
      notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.

      2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
      notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in
      the documentation and/or other materials provided with the
      distribution.

      3. The name “PHP” must not be used to endorse or promote products
      derived from this software without prior written permission. For
      written permission, please contact group@php.net.

      4. Products derived from this software may not be called “PHP”, nor
      may “PHP” appear in their name, without prior written permission
      from group@php.net. You may indicate that your software works in
      conjunction with PHP by saying “Foo for PHP” instead of calling
      it “PHP Foo” or “phpfoo””
      – sounds like FLOSS to me except that modifications cannot be called PHP without further permission, so it’s a walled-garden/closed shop, but still far more open than that other OS. I or anyone else can run, examine, modify and distribute the source code but there is no requirement that everyone downstream will be able to do the same (without the source code).

    So, they are all FLOSS whether Clarence Moon accepts that to be the case.

  29. oiaohm says:

    http://www.linuxfoundation.org/news-media/announcements/2012/04/linux-foundation-releases-annual-linux-development-report

    The annual report “More than 7,800 developers from almost 800 different companies have contributed to the Linux kernel”

    Yes 7,800 is not a perfect count the ones before git are not always counted.

    http://www.linuxfoundation.org/sites/main/files/lf_linux_kernel_development_2010.pdf

    “Since 2005, over 6100 individual developers from over 600 different companies have contributed”

    Yes 2005 is when Linux kernel starts counting its developers from. So yes there are a lot who are not counted. So in 2 years the development team grew by 200 companies and well over 1000 developers. So 500+ per year growth.

    Also the average is warped. Less than 20 percent don’t declare a company. So it roughly 8 developers per company.

    I guess kozmcrae you did not know about the annual reports.

  30. Clarence Moon says:

    what are you bitching about?

    I am certainly not complaining about anything. Rather, I am simply noting that the main line strength of FLOSS is a paper tiger. Of the LAMP stack, nothing really is in the FLOSS category. Other major open source projects, Android, Open Office, FireFox, Chrome, you name it, are not FLOSS, in the sense of GPL either.

    As a practical matter, Linux does not need any sort of license to support its goals. It is free to use once obtained and you can modify it yourself, if you feel like doing that and have any competency to do so, but only changes submitted back to Linus himself ever get into the next version of the product. Whatever you might come up with on your own is not likely to sell to anyone for money anyway and you cannot use the term Linux without violating Torvald’s trademark registration.

    So what is the real effect of FLOSS? I don’t think that it has any. Freeware is nice, of course, particularly if it works well enough to use in lieu of some commercial product. Why pay for a CD/DVD to MPx ripper when you can get it done perfectly with a free product? All browsers are free, whether open or closed source.

    I suspect that companies would always buy MS Office for the Exchange and Outlook support as well as the interfaces to .NET that support billions of lines of customization code produced over the past 8 years. Someone who only needed a naked Excel or Word document processed locally could use Open Office or other products for free. It is this business integration functionality that open source products lack and that keeps sales of MS Office at record breaking levels.

  31. kozmcrae says:

    oiaohm wrote:

    “kozmcrae about 1,000 contributors per release of the Linux kernel the total over the live of the project is way larger.”

    That’s what I said, over 1,000. I didn’t know the number but I knew it was over 1,000. Way over is still over. Right?

  32. oiaohm says:

    kozmcrae about 1,000 contributors per release of the Linux kernel the total over the live of the project is way larger.

  33. kozmcrae says:

    Clarence Moon wrote:

    “I don’t see where Moglen or the FSF is on a winning streak here.”

    What, did Linux switch to a BSD license? No it didn’t so what are you bitching about? That Linux didn’t move in total to the GPL3 license? There are over 1,000 contributors to the Linux kernel. Some of them aren’t even alive anymore. Many of them only made one contribution and the contributions are made under various licenses. They are not all under the GPL2. It’s not a simple matter of Linus saying okay everybody, Linux is now going to be covered under the GPL3 license. He couldn’t do that even if he wanted to.

  34. Clarence Moon says:

    FOSS, not FLOSS, eh, Mr. Pogson. For that matter, I think that Apache is not FLOSS by your definition and neither is PHP (anymore)

    Q. Why is PHP 4 not dual-licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL) like PHP 3 was?

    A. GPL enforces many restrictions on what can and cannot be done with the licensed code. The PHP developers decided to release PHP under a much more loose license (Apache-style), to help PHP become as popular as possible.

    Linux itself has not seen fit to adopt the latest machinations out of the FSF, nor has MySQL. I don’t see where Moglen or the FSF is on a winning streak here.

  35. oldman says:

    “That’s closer to GPL than it is to M$’s EULA.”

    But it still isnt GPL any more than the Apache license is.

  36. Clarence Moon tediously denied Mosaic is FLOSS, “Mosaic is not FLOSS per your definitions of the term.”

    COPYRIGHT:
    “* The UI grants you (hereafter, Licensee) a license to use the Software *
    * for academic, research and internal business purposes only, without a *
    * fee. Licensee may distribute the binary and source code (if released) *
    * to third parties provided that the copyright notice and this statement *
    * appears on all copies and that no charge is associated with such *
    * copies. *
    * *
    * Licensee may make derivative works. However, if Licensee distributes *
    * any derivative work based on or derived from the Software, then *
    * Licensee will (1) notify NCSA regarding its distribution of the *
    * derivative work, and (2) clearly notify users that such derivative *
    * work is a modified version and not the original NCSA Mosaic *
    * distributed by the UI. “

    That’s closer to GPL than it is to M$’s EULA. I imagine a licensing fee would not cost much for full usage considering how old the code is.

  37. Clarence Moon says:

    Most of those lines appeared in FLOSS first

    I think none of them did, Mr. Pogson. For starters, Mosaic is not FLOSS per your definitions of the term. Copying the UNIX source is a no-no, of course, and Linux merely copied the interface structures, presumably with from-scratch code. MySQL did indeed copycat the SQL language, which is all that Oracle does, and PHP, of course, is a wannabe version of ASP.

    Are you saying that Open Office is not a clumsy copy of MS Office today? There very own website touts that compatibility as their best selling point!

  38. kozmcrae says:

    Ivan the idiot wrote:

    “Sure… that’s why he sued everyone and their mother’s brother’s uncle’s sister’s cousin twice removed for using gpl code, he’s working for us… the money was just a nice kick back for himself.”

    Protecting your Internet freedom is one thing, defending the GPL is another. But if it’s the GPL you’re talking about, show me one case that went to trial and was determined by a full trial. And then when you get tired of looking for that, then look for how many times the GPL lost a case of infringement. Let me give you a little hint, your time is worth nothing.

  39. Ivan says:

    Sure… that’s why he sued everyone and their mother’s brother’s uncle’s sister’s cousin twice removed for using gpl code, he’s working for us… the money was just a nice kick back for himself.

  40. kozmcrae says:

    Viktor and Clarence Moon, you act as though Eben Moglen is trying to take something away from you. He is trying to keep something *from* being taken away from you, you assholes! It’s your Internet freedom. It’s not a guarantee. Governments and organizations are trying very diligently to take it away from us. If they succeed you may not be able to express yourself so freely as you do right now on this blog.

    Viktor and Clarence Moon, you either have some agenda you are working for or you are the most ignorant bastards there are. Eben Moglen is working for you, not against you.

  41. Clarence Moon prattled the same old line that FLOSS does not represent innovation, “Virtually all open source software is a copycat effort for some previously popularized commercial product. Linux itself is a copycat of UNIX, PHP copies ASP, Apache copied Netscape, and MySQL copied Oracle. Open Office chases Microsoft Office and several browsers trail after IE.”

    Most of those lines appeared in FLOSS first… IE copied Mosaic as did Netscape and others. Mosaic was created in academia and the UNIX source was liberally licensed:
    “The UI grants you (hereafter, Licensee) a license to use the Software *
    * for academic, research and internal business purposes only, without a *
    * fee. Licensee may distribute the binary and source code (if released) *
    * to third parties provided that the copyright notice and this statement *
    * appears on all copies and that no charge is associated with such *
    * copies. “
    (see ftp://ftp.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Web/Mosaic/COPYRIGHT ). MySQL did not copy Oracle. The databases are quite different except being variations on Standard Query Language which goes back ages. Linux implements a standard, POSIX, and does not copy anything. So, I would have to say that virtually no FLOSS copies anything else based on the sample provided. Indeed that would be illegal.

  42. Clarence Moon says:

    Clowns like Moglen are consequently ignoring the reality they live in.

    Nothing like that at all, Viktor. Rather, Moglen is playing to his unique audience as a pastor might preach to his choir. He elicits a hearty “Amen!” from these faithful and goes on to make his living by telling them what they want to hear.

    Open source software is truly useful, I think, but it doesn’t rise to the sort of noble crusade that it is portrayed as being. Virtually all open source software is a copycat effort for some previously popularized commercial product. Linux itself is a copycat of UNIX, PHP copies ASP, Apache copied Netscape, and MySQL copied Oracle. Open Office chases Microsoft Office and several browsers trail after IE.

    Thus the notion of “innovation” is bandied about but does not apply. To the extent that open source code can serve as sample code to someone actually doing something new, it is valuable. For the great majority of those who want to use freeware in lieu of paying for some proprietary product, it is totally superfluous. Pogson himself admits that he doesn’t dabble in code modification for fixes to things like the spam filter here. Rather, he waits for someone else to do it, apparently a long time now.

  43. Viktor wrote, “If I buy a piece of electronic equipment, I can “hack” on it. Nobody is hindering me. It’s just a matter of how much I want to do this.”

    Read the EULAs. You are not allowed to reverse-engineer M$’s software if you buy a PC with it. Hollywood has encrypted their videos. DRM was built into Vista. A lot of software in consumer electronic is actually embedded in silicon and may not be modified without replacing a chip. One could try “man in the middle” attacks somehow but “they” have got government to make laws declaring unlocking DRM a crime… So, how do you legally hack much these days unless it is FLOSS?

  44. Viktor says:

    Blah, blah, blah.

    Some a*s-hat is conjuring up the Matrix all over again, because he fears for his income.

    Yes, Eben Moglen is very well paid for his services.

    Of course, he has to create bizarre dystopian scenarios. It’s his job.

    But it just doesn’t add up.

    If I buy a piece of electronic equipment, I can “hack” on it. Nobody is hindering me. It’s just a matter of how much I want to do this.

    But the ultimate failure of clowns like Moglen is the misplaced believe that everyone who has a smart phone in his or her pocket wants to “hack” it.

    How many people are today doing a menial task like changing their summer tires for winter tires by themselves? Most people just drive to a tire dealer or to a garage and let someone do it.

    Everyone doing or wanting to do or being able to do anything is only possible in a utopian society.

    Which is not ours.

    Clowns like Moglen are consequently ignoring the reality they live in.

    Like you, Pogson.

Leave a Reply