Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.

Ubuntu Software Center is Mixing Proprietary and Free Software in a Dangerous Way

posted by n1 on Monday June 08 2015, @03:16AM   Printer-friendly
from the mix-and-match dept.

tonymercmobily writes:

I have been watching the evolution of the Ubuntu Software Center for quite a while now. I had doubts about its interface and its speed, but I liked the fact that it offered an easy, down-to-earth interface that allowed users to install software easily. However, I have to say that the way the Ubuntu Software Center has evolved is worrying me -- a lot. I am not against the idea of selling software. What I am against, is confusing proprietary software with non-proprietary software, The Ubuntu Software Center seems to be doing just that.

[ Editor's Note: The submission appears to have come directly from the author of the original article. ]
Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Ubuntu Software Center is Mixing Proprietary and Free Software in a Dangerous Way | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 49 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 1) by Shimitar on Monday June 08 2015, @08:26AM

    by Shimitar (4208) on Monday June 08 2015, @08:26AM (#193572) Homepage

    The Short Answer: YES

    The Not So Short Answer:
    Let's not get confused. The GPL license applies to software you either include in your own or modify, it does not apply to by-products of it's usage. So, yes, you can use the GCC compiler (which is GPLv3) to produce proprietary, closed-source software you want to sell or monetize in any way you want.

    What you CANNOT do is modify GCC and sell it without providing your modification...
    What you CANNOT do is link GPL-only libraries to your non-GPL sources...

    So, again, yes you can, provided you don't link any pure GPL library to it, which is not so hard since almost all the common used libraries on linux are LGPL, BSD or other non so strictly licensed. Yes, including glibc which is LGPL.

    GPL is aboud freedom and make sure that freedom cannot be removed at any point in time, just that.

    Think of it, it would be quite useless to have a GIMP which forces you to release ANY photo or draw you make as creative-commons or GPL, right? Likewhise, think a Calligra/KOffice word which forces you to release as GPL any book or article you write...

    Why should it be different for compiler output?

    --
    Coding is an art. No, java is not coding. Yes, i am biased, i know, sorry if this bothers you.

  • (Score: 2) by jasassin on Monday June 08 2015, @10:44AM

    by jasassin (3566) <jasassin@gmail.com> on Monday June 08 2015, @10:44AM (#193596) Homepage Journal

    Think of it, it would be quite useless to have a GIMP which forces you to release ANY photo or draw you make as creative-commons or GPL, right? Likewhise, think a Calligra/KOffice word which forces you to release as GPL any book or article you write...
    Why should it be different for compiler output?

    I am not a lawyer and they have ways to twist these things. I do not know the answer to your question, although thank you for your response.

    --
    jasassin@gmail.com GPG Key ID: 0xE6462C68A9A3DB5A