Subject: Re: Two GPL Questions
From: Rick Moen <>
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:26:02 -0800

begin Justin Wells quotation:


> Its adversarity, say Microsoft Corp., has different ideas about how
> the GPL v3 should be worded... for example, allowing Microsoft (and
> only Microsoft) to incorporate all GPL'd software into Windows.

(Lawfully and with public acknowledgement, you mean.  For all we know,
there's plenty already there.)

Result Primus:  The next versions of all GPLed work no longer permit
accepting the software under GPL v. 3.  Microsoft Corp. finds that it
has gained only the right to a proprietary fork of old versions, if it 
cares to maintain them.

Result Secundus:  The free software world immediately gains a propaganda
victory of epic proportions.  Which is of course why the Redmondites
wouldn't be dumb enough to pursue that strategy in the first place.

This message falsely claims to have been scanned for viruses with F-Secure
Anti-Virus for Microsoft Exchange and to have been found clean.
license-discuss archive is at