[plug] Flamebait

[The Thought Assassin]

On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Oliver White wrote:
> Ok... I'm a pretty open minded guy, but am I the only one who thinks
> stallman's response to the GPLing of the QT library is being a tad
> unforgiving?
It seemed very forgiving to me, at least in a legal sense. :)
I presume by "unforgiving" you mean that he explicitly forgave them, thus
implying that they should not be forgiven implicitly? I agree it does seem
that way, but unfortunately, in the legal world, these things must be done
explicitly. The GPL contains a clause by which violating the GPL on a
particular piece of code bars the violator from using that code under the
GPL in the future, even in a conforming manner. For this reason, it is
necessary for the holder of the copyright to explicitly "forgive" the
violation to prevent any further use of the code still being in violation
of the GPL. Obviously RMS knows the supreme importance to our community
of the GPL's legal sanctity, and is taking the necessary steps to ensure
that it's standing is not undermined.

Having said that, I would be shocked if the FSF actually did hold
copyright to any KDE code, as they would certainly have pursued the issue
legally by now, for the same reason. As such, it was perhaps a little
presumptious of RMS to offer forgiveness when it was not needed. On the
other hand, it does set a very good example for others whose code may have
been used illicitly by KDE in the past.

In summary, I don't think he was forgiving or unforgiving, he was just
RMS. RMS seems to be one of the few people who can think on a purely
intellectual level without allowing emotion or social expectation to
interfere. As such he can seem insensitive, but is always, always
consistent in his beliefs/opinions and his statements.

-Greg Mildenhall