The idea of a deal like this is not ridiculous. After all the idea of
the GNU GPL is that it is a lever to make other software free. If a
deal makes other software free, it is doing the same job. If they are
willing to accept a deal in which some part of their software becomes
free software, that deal might be good for the community.
But please don't settle for a change which goes less than far enough
to make a program free software. Making any amount of software
"closer to free" but not *actually* free would not really contribute
anything to the free software community.
For example, if they offer two alternative deals, one in which they
make program A free software, and one in which they make two programs
A and B somewhat closer but no cigar, the deal in which program A
becomes really free is better. That deal does result in more free
software.
Also, it would make sense to ask, "Is this software useful for the
free software community"? If it can't be of any use except on BeOS,
then its usefulness to us is limited. And if the idea is that Be will
make some program free, perhaps it is best just to insist "Make the
program that uses our code free".
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu