Attacks on GPL suggest it is winning
You can look at the GPL’s growing usage, its dominance in FLOSS licensing, and elsewhere as signs that it’s winning in its markets. But for me, the best indicator that the GPL is winning is the increasingly vitrolic attacks piled on it.
You can always spot a winner by the bull’s-eye painted on it. No one bothers to diss a loser.
It’s not just proprietary software companies that are on the scent. Many “open-core” / “fauxpen” projects have gone on the offensive, claiming the GPL is “inferior” or “less free” and fear-mongering about what the FSF or RMS will do with future versions of the license.
Is this an indication that fauxpen sourcers can’t compete in the market and must instead resort to FUD?
For the GPL and the FSF, the increasing vehemence of the attacks on it should signal that it’s doing something right. In fact, many “somethings” right.
| This entry was posted by Jason on November 2, 2009 at 11:37 am, and is filed under Free Software, Propriatery Technology. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
about 4 months ago
By your argument, then, we can deduce that Windows has completely defeated open source.
about 4 months ago
Yes! Exactly correct! Oh snap, I just remembered a small point. A tiny, tiny point:
It’s not MY argument.
Rather it is the argument of one of the quote-quote “Most influential people in Open Source” end-quote-quote. Which is why I provided the “Inspired by” link. I guess that’s too subtle for some readers? Here I’ll ruin the joke by explaining it, just for anyone else at the back of the class:
Someone who is among the quote-quote “most influential people in Open Source” end-quote-quote constantly fills a blog with the most idiotic and illogical arguments, and – surprise, surprise! – one of his favorite targets is the GPL and Free Software ideals.
By satirizing his own exact words – if one grants the trivial changes I made the lofty label of satire – we see how foolish not only his arguments are, but how foolish those are that put such spokesmen and arguments up on a pedestal.