[ILUG-BOM] Forbes.com: Toppling Linux
Sun Oct 29 06:07:53 IST 2006
On Saturday 28 October 2006 18:53, Philip Tellis wrote:
> He's not saying that the GPL should allow proprietary software or
> that it's bad. All he's saying is that the GPL takes away one of the
> developer's freedoms.
> That's not entirely correct though, at it stems from the fact that
> proprietary software is incorrectly named. The word proprietary
> means "owned or belonging to someone". All software is owned by
> someone (the author) unless explicitly placed in the public domain.
> So, if there's anything that isn't proprietary software, it's public
> domain software. Everything else is proprietary, including GPLed
> software, BSD licenced software and restrictive EULA wrapped
I understood what he was trying to say. But according to Stallman
creation of proprietary software was of no consequence. Hence it doesnt
even count as a freedom. I am taking the historical meaning of
proprietary software and not the one that you just defined.
Dinesh A. Joshi
More information about the Linuxers