[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "the current GPLv3 draft looks fine
Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "the current GPLv3 draft looks fine apart from ... Just google for torvalds tit-for-tat ... I don't ask for money."
Fri, 15 Jun 2007 00:15:47 +0200
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> > Is there anything other than TiVOization to justify these statements?
> Do you need anything else?
> But if by the question you mean "would you think the GPLv3 is fine without
> the new language in section 6 about the 'consumer devices'", then the
> answer is that yes, I think that the current GPLv3 draft looks fine apart
> from that.
> > Also, can you elaborate on what you mean about 'giving back in kind'?
> > (I suspect this is related with the tit-for-tat reasoning, that you've
> > failed to elaborate on before)
> I've *not* failed to elaborate on that before. Not at all.
> Just google for
> torvalds tit-for-tat
> and you'll see a lot of my previous postings. Trying to claim that this is
> somehow "new" is ludicrous. In fact, some of the google hits you find are
> from 2004, *loong* before the current GPLv3 discussion.
> So your "failed to elaborate" is not a failure on my side.
> Giving back "in kind" is obvious. I give you source code to do with as you
> see fit. I just expect you to give back in kind: source code for me to do
> with as I see fit, under the same license I gave you source code.
> How hard is that to accept?
> I don't ask for money. I don't ask for sexual favors. I don't ask for
> access to the hardware you design and sell. I just ask for the thing I
> gave you: source code that I can use myself.
> I really don't think my "tit-for-tat" or "give back in kind" is that hard
> to understand, is it?
> And no, it's not a new concept. Neither is the fact that I've never agreed
> with the FSF's agenda about "freedom" (as defined by _them_ - I have a
> notion of "freedom" myself, and the FSF doesn't get to define it for me).
> I don't call Linux "Free Software". I haven't called it that for close to
> ten years! Because I think the term "Open Source" is a lot better.
> > The only thing the GPL demands is respect for others' freedoms, as in,
> > "I, the author, respect your freedoms, so you, the licensee, must
> > respect others' freedoms as well". Is this the "in kind" you're
> > talking about? Or are you mistaken about the actual meaning of even
> > GPLv2?
> I respect your freedom to design products around Linux. You can do
> whatever you damn well please - I just ask that you give the software back
> in a usable form. That's all I ask for.
> And that's all the GPLv2 asks for.
> Which is why I selected the GPLv2 in the first place, and why I *still*
> think the GPLv2 is a wonderful license!
> So I claim that the "freedoms" that the GPLv2 embodies are *greater* than
> the "freedoms" embodied in the GPLv3.
(Leader of the Free World)
Torvalds' home is spacious - a split-level, five-bedroom spread with a
three-car garage and a backyard Jacuzzi housed in a wooden gazebo. The
master bedroom affords enviable views of the hills and is so large that
it contains both an exercise bike and a treadmill (neither of which,
Torvalds confesses, he ever uses). Another room upstairs, outfitted with
a pool table, wet bar, and temperature-controlled mini wine cellar,
serves as his playpen. The home teems with the Linux mascot, from
porcelain penguins in various sizes to partying penguins on a blue hand
towel in the guest bathroom. But his favorite toy is a sunburst-yellow
Mercedes SLK32 sitting in the garage. Still, it's the rear end of the
black Acura SUV next to it that draws my attention. The faithful can be
seen up and down Highway 101 in Northern California, driving their
7-year-old Hondas and used Volvos outfitted with bumper stickers that
proclaim them Linux rebels. But the gleaming silver license plate frame
affixed to Tove's car reads: coffee, chocolate, men: some things are
Torvalds was hardly wealthy his first few years in the Valley. Dotcom
kids were getting rich on inventions barely worth mentioning in the same
breath as Linux, yet he was living modestly on his Transmeta salary, his
growing family cramped in a duplex. People would send him emails
pleading for a handout, assuming he was as flush as he was famous. A man
he never met even asked him to deliver the eulogy at his father's
funeral. Steve Jobs and Bill Joy were among the tech bigwigs who
contacted him out of the blue. He was idolized by fans and at the same
time burdened by the practical worries of any Valley-based programmer
struggling to make ends meet. His mother recalls him fretting about the
eventual cost of college tuition for his children.
His fortunes changed in 1999. Red Hat and VA Linux, both leading
purveyors of Linux-based software packages tailored for large
enterprises, had granted him stock options with no strings attached,
thank-yous from entrepreneurs who hoped to grow rich off his creation.
When Red Hat went public that year, Torvalds was suddenly worth $1
million. On the day VA Linux (now VA Software) went public, Torvalds was
worth roughly $20 million, though by the time he could sell his shares,
they were valued at only a fraction of that.
Torvalds hesitated before buying himself his first expensive bauble, a
two-seater BMW convertible. "I was a bit nervous about people's
reaction," he confesses. "Are they going to think I've gone over to the
dark side?" In the end he decided that the shape and price of the hunk
of metal he drove to and from work each day was his own business.
Despite counsel to the contrary, Torvalds wisely sold all of his stock
and spent almost all of the windfall on his home and his cars, trusting
that he'd always be able to earn a good salary as an engineer.
For the moment, Torvalds has the security of his post at the Open Source
Development Lab, an organization whose scope and ranks have expanded
along with Linux. Created in 2000 by a small consortium of major
technology companies, including Intel and Hewlett-Packard, the OSDL
aimed to accelerate Linux's adoption by financing well-equipped labs
where programmers could test software features built specifically for
the corporate world. Today, the organization has more than two dozen
employees working in labs in Beaverton, Oregon, and in Yokohama, Japan,
and 23 sponsoring companies - some of which contribute as much as $1
million a year.
"We seek to be the center of gravity for Linux development," says Stuart
Cohen, who took over as CEO of the lab in April. Working groups staffed
by employees of member corporations meet regularly to devise wish lists
meant to tailor Linux for use in new areas, such as global telecom
networks and high-end servers running the most demanding software
For Torvalds, a well-paying gig as the lab's first full-time research
fellow seemed like a dream come true. He'd be able to do what he's
always done, but without the Transmeta-related obligations that were
vying for his time. Instead, he started the job just as SCO's McBride
declared that pretty much anyone using Linux is violating copyright laws
and ripping off SCO. "With the US legal system, it's always hard to tell
what the hell is going to happen," Torvalds says. "So I can't just
dismiss the lawsuit as the complete crapola I think it is."
Near the end of our day together, Torvalds and I head out in his
Mercedes to eat at a nearby sushi place, followed by a visit to
Starbucks. Behind the wheel, Torvalds is manic and possessed, driving
with such a lead foot that even a brief ride leaves me woozy. "The man
with the flashy car," says the Starbucks barista who greets Torvalds,
"the man with the secret wild alter ego." She brings him a tall double
latte without waiting for him to order.
Here we finally talk about what Torvalds describes as the
"unpleasantness" surrounding the SCO suit. The smile that graced his
face for hours is gone. The man who only 30 minutes ago seemed incapable
of a bad mood sits slumped in his chair.
"So now they're going to try the hard work of cracking 'Freedom'. Free,
well that means stuff you don't pay for"
-- Eben Moglen ("Moglen: How we'll kill the Microsoft Novell deal")
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- INQUIRER: "Torvalds remains unconvinced by GPL3", (continued)
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- INQUIRER: "Torvalds remains unconvinced by GPL3", rjack, 2007/06/12
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Sin's Schwartz to Linus: "I invite you to my house for dinner. I'll cook, you bring the wine.", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/13
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- BSD's de Raadt to Sin's Schwartz: "let me give an example of the duplicity of Sun", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/13
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linux-Watch: "Linspire, Microsoft in Linux-related deal", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/14
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "I'm damn fed up with the FSF", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/14
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "I'd be a total moron to relicense the kernel under what I believe is a worse license", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/14
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Eben: "Lawyers licensed to practice in any country are invited", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/14
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "You're a moron. I'm the original author", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/14
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "I'm intelligent", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/14
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "It's about keeping *me* happy ... Your *IDIOTIC* suggestion is explicitly against the whole POINT!", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/14
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "the current GPLv3 draft looks fine apart from ... Just google for torvalds tit-for-tat ... I don't ask for money.",
Alexander Terekhov <=
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Brownawell: "GPLv3, DFSG, Tivo, and GPLv3 (a different part of it)", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/16
- dot Communist Eben meets Indian Marxist-Leninist (his life after GPLv3 so to speak :-) ), Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/16
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "GPLv2 does not state that you have to become a slave of rms", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/16
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "I've been told by several independent sources..." (re "GPLv2 is not a 'contract' but a 'pure copyright license'"), Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/16
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Landley: "Not Going There (tm)" (re 'license' vs 'contract'), Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/16
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- SYS-CON: "Think Linus Will Defer to Sun on GPLv3? The Answer May Hinge on a Bottle of Wine", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/16
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Landley: "Not Going There (tm)" (re 'license' vs 'contract'), rjack, 2007/06/16
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Viro: "you are preaching to non-believers", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/16
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Viro: "_that_ is a final draft?", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/19
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Williams: "it's time to drop the GPL", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/19