|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Thunderbird may not be free in the future [message #90031 is a reply to message #89990] |
Thu, 20 September 2007 07:13   |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>I suggest you down load the latest version of Thunderbird, it may no longer
>be free in the future. It's been spun off for profit.
For someone who accuses other people of spreading FUD, James, this is pretty
gruesome FUD. I finally had the time to track down the story. The Mozilla
Foundation, the entity created when Netscape killed themselves by joining
AOL and released the source to Netscape, has spun off Thunderbird to its
own wholly owned subsidiary. It's 'for profit' in the sense that it wants
to survive and pay developers. This is precisely what Firefox is (they make
their money largely by having google be the default home page), and the license
on the code is a few small steps away from being GPL compatible. It also
enforces some restrictions on artwork. This is why my Debian boxes use a
browser called 'Iceweasel' (get it, fire => ice, fox => weasel) which is
firefox stripped of the artwork. This uses the 'escape clause' in the Mozilla
license that offers people to choose another license. From the FSF's own
page.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Mozilla Public License (MPL)
This is a free software license which is not a strong copyleft; unlike
the X11 license, it has some complex restrictions that make it incompatible
with the GNU GPL. That is, a module covered by the GPL and a module covered
by the MPL cannot legally be linked together. We urge you not to use the
MPL for this reason.
However, MPL 1.1 has a provision (section 13) that allows a program (or
parts of it) to offer a choice of another license as well. If part of a program
allows the GNU GPL as an alternate choice, or any other GPL-compatible license
as an alternate choice, that part of the program has a GPL-compatible license.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I realize you are not completely comfortable understanding non-proprietary
software, but in the future please get your story straight before posting
FUD like this.
TCB
|
|
|
|
| Re: Thunderbird may not be free in the future [message #90046 is a reply to message #90031] |
Thu, 20 September 2007 10:37 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I saw a news blip where they said that you might be paying for Thunderbird
in the future because the software was spun off for profit. This wasn't
FUD on my part, I was just trying to get the word out to people that use
Thunderbird.
Apple's market share is not at 3%, you need to do more research before you
post. Apple has put out the Xserves and their hard drive raids, so I don't
know what you mean by they have ignored you, but whatever. The bottom line
is , quit Mac bashing! Any time anything thing is said about anything Mac
or Apple you guys have something negative to say. By the way, I taken plenty
of personal insults here on this NG.
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>I suggest you down load the latest version of Thunderbird, it may no longer
>>be free in the future. It's been spun off for profit.
>
>For someone who accuses other people of spreading FUD, James, this is pretty
>gruesome FUD. I finally had the time to track down the story. The Mozilla
>Foundation, the entity created when Netscape killed themselves by joining
>AOL and released the source to Netscape, has spun off Thunderbird to its
>own wholly owned subsidiary. It's 'for profit' in the sense that it wants
>to survive and pay developers. This is precisely what Firefox is (they make
>their money largely by having google be the default home page), and the
license
>on the code is a few small steps away from being GPL compatible. It also
>enforces some restrictions on artwork. This is why my Debian boxes use a
>browser called 'Iceweasel' (get it, fire => ice, fox => weasel) which is
>firefox stripped of the artwork. This uses the 'escape clause' in the Mozilla
>license that offers people to choose another license. From the FSF's own
>page.
>
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Mozilla Public License (MPL)
>
> This is a free software license which is not a strong copyleft; unlike
>the X11 license, it has some complex restrictions that make it incompatible
>with the GNU GPL. That is, a module covered by the GPL and a module covered
>by the MPL cannot legally be linked together. We urge you not to use the
>MPL for this reason.
>
> However, MPL 1.1 has a provision (section 13) that allows a program
(or
>parts of it) to offer a choice of another license as well. If part of a
program
>allows the GNU GPL as an alternate choice, or any other GPL-compatible license
>as an alternate choice, that part of the program has a GPL-compatible license.
>
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>I realize you are not completely comfortable understanding non-proprietary
>software, but in the future please get your story straight before posting
>FUD like this.
>
>TCB
|
|
|
|
| Re: Thunderbird may not be free in the future [message #90049 is a reply to message #90046] |
Thu, 20 September 2007 11:04 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
No, James, you didn't 'try to get the word out' to people using Thunderbird.
You posted completely erroneous, ill-informed information for Thunderbird
users that ten minutes on google and a basic understanding of software licenses
could have corrected. Unless that's what you mean by 'getting the word out'
of course.
TCB
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>I saw a news blip where they said that you might be paying for Thunderbird
>in the future because the software was spun off for profit. This wasn't
>FUD on my part, I was just trying to get the word out to people that use
>Thunderbird.
>
>Apple's market share is not at 3%, you need to do more research before you
>post. Apple has put out the Xserves and their hard drive raids, so I don't
>know what you mean by they have ignored you, but whatever. The bottom
line
>is , quit Mac bashing! Any time anything thing is said about anything Mac
>or Apple you guys have something negative to say. By the way, I taken plenty
>of personal insults here on this NG.
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>I suggest you down load the latest version of Thunderbird, it may no longer
>>>be free in the future. It's been spun off for profit.
>>
>>For someone who accuses other people of spreading FUD, James, this is pretty
>>gruesome FUD. I finally had the time to track down the story. The Mozilla
>>Foundation, the entity created when Netscape killed themselves by joining
>>AOL and released the source to Netscape, has spun off Thunderbird to its
>>own wholly owned subsidiary. It's 'for profit' in the sense that it wants
>>to survive and pay developers. This is precisely what Firefox is (they
make
>>their money largely by having google be the default home page), and the
>license
>>on the code is a few small steps away from being GPL compatible. It also
>>enforces some restrictions on artwork. This is why my Debian boxes use
a
>>browser called 'Iceweasel' (get it, fire => ice, fox => weasel) which is
>>firefox stripped of the artwork. This uses the 'escape clause' in the Mozilla
>>license that offers people to choose another license. From the FSF's own
>>page.
>>
>>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>> Mozilla Public License (MPL)
>>
>> This is a free software license which is not a strong copyleft; unlike
>>the X11 license, it has some complex restrictions that make it incompatible
>>with the GNU GPL. That is, a module covered by the GPL and a module covered
>>by the MPL cannot legally be linked together. We urge you not to use the
>>MPL for this reason.
>>
>> However, MPL 1.1 has a provision (section 13) that allows a program
>(or
>>parts of it) to offer a choice of another license as well. If part of a
>program
>>allows the GNU GPL as an alternate choice, or any other GPL-compatible
license
>>as an alternate choice, that part of the program has a GPL-compatible license.
>>
>>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>I realize you are not completely comfortable understanding non-proprietary
>>software, but in the future please get your story straight before posting
>>FUD like this.
>>
>>TCB
>
|
|
|
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
