GPL-2.0 The Troll License

kroah.com/log/blog/2017/10/16/linux-kernel-community-enforcement-statement/

Other urls found in this thread:

phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Linux-Enforcement-Statement
gnu.org/licenses/gpl-violation.html
gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Linux-Enforcement-Statement

tl;dr?

Linux isn't free

If you don't like it go make your own, fucking parasites.

Can you now pirate linux?

Oy, this is anti Semitic. My foundation will sue for this trauma.

hurd when?

This is what they get for not upgrading to Version 3.0. No sympathies coming from this user.

no links to the GNU project's website gnu.org/licenses/gpl-violation.html or gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html (the author of GPLv2) about the GPL or GPL violation but everywhere else

How many times must Stallman be proven right with expensive consequences before faggots start listening?

lawyers considered harmful

If linux had gone GPL 3 earlier on, we could have escaped the whole smartphone thing.

Has anyone investigated who this Patrick McHardy is? It sounds like a over the top Irish name, so I'm wondering if it is an alias for a hook nosed yid.

How so? Smartphones would have just been made on proprietary software.

He isn't going to change his mind.

Linus holds 15+ year old grudge against someone who said shit (lied to him) on a mailing list about the ==DRAFT== of the GPLv3.
Since then he has no trust towards the FSF or Stallman even tho the GPLv2 is making more damage than anything else in the tech world.
At least he protects the linux kernel against the SJW cult and has some good dev habits.
I just wish he would just move on to the v3 it would do so much good to the tech world.

Google would have to let people have control over their smartphone and other devices that uses the kernel.
With the v3 google could still add some malware/botnet functions and people could remove them if they know about it everybody wins in this situation.
Or their might completely not use it and use some other kernel just like Qualcomm use the cucklicensed l4 microkernel in 99% of android phones (and most of hardware) for their OS implemented radio chip and one of the most famous was snapdragon.
Again we can thanks the cucks who don't want to allow us the ownership of the hardware that we buy.

But then they would have to spend their own resources developing something like the Linux kernel, thereby lagging behind free software in terms of quality.


I can't wait for the day we have a Linux replacement under GPLv3+. Torvalds is a resentful ass.


That's why it's called a draft and not the final version. And sometimes promises have to be broken; I rustling Torvalds' jimmies is what one have to do to protect freedom, then so be it. First they wanted to suck Jewgle's cock and talk about what a great thing it is that they only have to focus on fewer smartphones, but when it turns out that the replacement license (which has been available for 10 years) turned out to be better, they turn around and play the victim. This could have been prevented if Torvalds had some foresight instead of being childish and immature. Stallman has always been upfront about protecting users from developers, not protecting the cashflow to large corporations.

Pic related, Google (main developer of Android (which uses the Linux kernel)) is shown 3rd from the bottom left. It shows when different companies entered into the PRISM program which feeds information directly to the NSA. One could wonder if staying at the GPLv2 helped the NSA spy on Android users. But the most important thing in the world is that Stallman changed his mind and for that he must be hated.

(Not to mention that monolithic kernels are just so 1960s)

Fucking retards.

Some may consider it as extortion as his only intention is to get money.

The only thing worse than being a bug chasing faggot and deadbeat dad is Tim Cook.

...

Coming Soon
And to think people say this community is dead.

Whew I've never seen Linus look this stupid.

GNO!
Please tell me this is a joke
Let me guess, "C.Webber".
Guix adopted a CoC because of him and some puppets who just follow his "nice and comforting" cult.

Nazi LARPers are degenerate subhumans confirmed

BSD license still cuck license, you gommie/brainlets?

...

...

You are a confirmed idiot.

fuck off, go back to pol, schizo cultist

What, precisely, is the problem here?
I thought taking large corporations to task for violating open-source licenses was something people here supported?
Why would preventing this be a good thing?

What I believe a lot of people think is that the Linux community wants it both ways: they want the clarifications of GPLv3 but the TiVocucking opportunities of GPLv2. I have no problem with copyright holders strictly enforcing copyleft licenses but my problem is that Torvalds et al. is bawwwing about Linux contributors not going soft on violators when the solution has been present for 10 years: the GNU General Public License version 3. They are doing some elegant Mental Gymnastics around even considering changing to GPLv3. That's my comment. Not someone becoming a millionaire because (((corporations))) think copyleft is just an internet meme, and not an existing legal concept with financial ramifications.

tl;dr: Kroah-Hartman and Torvalds want a GPLv2.5 with the clarifications from version 3 without its anti-TiVoization clause, but won't even admit there are advantages to GPLv3 over GPLv2. (Little do they know GPLv3 explicitly allows exceptions.)

(Pic not related)

...

You do realize that any "additional permissions" that a distributor applies to a v3 licensed program can be removed by a downstream distributor.

Honestly, this just proves what BSD people have been saying all along. Software licensing is not how you promote free software. There will always be someone who can outjew your license.

Stallman's been saying this. His way to promote free software is through speeches and written articles. The GPL exists to make use of copyright law to ensure that software distributors are not able to fork the GPL software into proprietary software.

The best actual way to promote free software is to break the conditioning and get the average user to realize how badly they're getting fucked in the ass by software jews, who ship incomplete, insecure, and/or backdoored products you can't control, change, fix, or update. That way they'll finally realize that proprietary software has no legitimate reason to be.

Do you not realize that the conditioning includes a high pain tolerance/indifference to that kind of shit?

BSD is a whore license, Mozilla and Apache are cuck licenses

All (((lawyers))) should be killed.

...

Can you expand on this thought? How is GPLv2 causing more damage than, say, San Francisco?
What would that improve?

If GPL3 prevented Google from doing what they wanted with Android, they'd just swap out the kernel with something else (probably something BSD) or fork Linux from the last GPL2. They certainly have enough cash to do the later, particularly since the scope of Android is limited.

Shit nigger, do you think GPL3 has slowed down Apple's iOS abomination? Of course not, they just built it with BSD licensed software. As long as BSD licensed software exists, GPL3 cannot protect software users from predatory international corporations.

What practical effects does this actually have?

Just send patches, use the software, and never socialize with other developers. Why would you socialize with other developers anyway, unless you're some sort of house-bound NEET who needs to seek social interaction in a scheme-meme linux distro development team.

Avoided what? Android being anti-consumer shit? If Android couldn't be anti-consumer using Linux, it would be anti-consumer using BSD instead. What would that actually improve?

And GPL3 won't stop Systemd, so the greatest threat to the Linux users wouldn't be slowed by GPL3.

I don't really believe this is possible. Most people care so little about computers. Computers are only a very small aspect of their life, and they barely know how to use them.

This is very likely.

Think about it: isn't it possible that Linus is just sticking with GPLv2 to build up all this corporate dependency on it, so when he finally switches to GPLv3 he brings more jews with it.

Linus will never change Linux to GPLv3. He doesn't like this license.

Stay triggered, you jewish /utg/ kike.

How is this a bad thing and how do I start doing it?