Linux Today is not responsible for the content of the message below.
GreyGeek - Subject: The OSI was hijacked ... ( Feb 17, 2009, 16:58:22 )
Linux is where it is today, despite the constant attacks from Microsoft and its sycophants, and other proprietary businesses, entirely because it is impossible for them to hijack GPL code.
So, if they can't hijack the GPL they tried the next best thing: surround the GPL with licenses which CLAIM to be similar to the GPL but were not. The uninformed, walking into the forest of OSI "approved" licenses, stands a strong chance of being deceived into believing that a license they might choose is "identical" because they heard that the GPL is Open Source and the OSI is the "Open Source" Initiative. What their guides through the forest lead them away from is the TRUE open source license, the GPL.
When you acquire an application that is GPL you are guaranteed that: 1) You have the same rights over that application as the person or company from which you got the application. 2) You have the right to obtain the source code of the binary of that application which, when compiled, produces an EXACT copy of the binary of the application you were given. 3) You can modify the source code any way you wish and 3a) If you don't share your modified application then you don't have to share your changes, 3b) If you do share your modified application you MUST give the people receiving it the same rights you were given, which includes access to the original source and the source code you added. 4) If they violate the GPL then they lose ALL rights to distribute the GPL portion of the code, but you do not. 5) You cannot sign away your GPL rights as part of an agreement to recive a GPL application. See #4.
Why do these PHONY FOSS companies want to lure you away from the GPL with PHONY FOSS LICENSES? Simple. If it is not "Bait and Switch" then it's called LOCK-IN. You download a binary of an application that has a feature you like. You become dependent on that feature, but decide to improve it. You ask for the source code but are informed that you'll have to pay $10,000 for it, or that it is proprietary, even though the binary "is not". Or, even though you haven't asked for the source, you are informed later that the "Open Source" license is being revoked and the only way to continue using the application is to pay for a "License" to use it.
The most common form of "bait and switch" is in regard to exploitation of the FOSS developer and user base. A company announces "beta" trials of a new application and supplies free downloads from its server. It may even be under the GPL. Users download and begin using it, reporting bugs and missing features back to the company, thinking that they are contributing to the FOSS movement in general and that "GPL" application specifically. After some time, when the application is polished, the company announces that the beta trial is over and that the beta version is no longer being supported, and it is removed from the download servers. Additional features, kept secret, are added to the application and then it is released under a PROPRIETARY license.
ALL of the efforts of the FOSS community were, effectively, STOLEN. It is THEFT BY DECEPTION. It is a WELL KNOWN and LONG standing tradition of the FOSS community that developers release code "early and often" so that the community can pitch in and help squash bugs, because most who develop under the GPL cannot afford to pay for QC or bug testing. Unscrupulous companies have decided that although they are going to market a proprietary product for profit, they don't want to pay for QC or testing either. They decided they will STEAL those services by leaving the impression that the software is or will be GPL, knowing full well that it will not be.
Another, partial theft, is where the company releases a "beta" under the GPL and when the writing and testing is complete they shut down the beta code and release a "limited" version under the GPL. The REAL application, including a lot of code improved by the FOSS community, is released as a proprietary application.
SUMMARY: There is only ONE TRUE FOSS License, the GPL. Any other license gives the user less freedom and/or less security in knowing that the code can't be hijacked they way Microsoft and Apple HIJACKED the BSD and the FreeBSD.
