I registered to respond to this topic because it's sometime I feel strongly about. This post is not intended to be a flame so please forgive me if it comes across as one.
I find it extremely ironic that free software zealots have no problems with installing propriety drivers themselves but they do have a problem with distributions including those drivers to make life easier for their users.
I also find it ironic that one of the most talked about open source technologies today is the 3D desktop, however in order to use that desktop closed source drivers must be installed.
It is also interesting (as noted by Distrowatch here http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20060515#news ) that these FSF zealots go after the little guy on the block (like Kororaa or Linux Mint) and completely ignore the big corporation distributions who include these drivers such as Linspire/Freespire, Mephis, Mandriva, or Xandros.
I have every respect for RMS , the FSF, and the GPL. However there are a lot of contributors who made Linux what it is today, and not all of them agree with RMS. To those who don't want to run a system with some closed source drivers enabled, I say use a Linux distribution that doesn't include them.
I fail to see how closed source free drivers are worse than open source reverse engineering.
The way I look at it is that I have the right to use it since I paid for the content.
None of us will ever truly know enough about this until it actually goes to court.
tenshu wrote:Respecting the law isn't a choice it is a duty
tenshu wrote:I were comprehensive in my last posts, but now i'm sure Linux Mint is an Ubuntu including GPL infringements.
Could somebody please explain this alleged violation of the GPL in Mint.
I understand that some don't think there is a violation, while others think there is, but what I want to know is, "What is the supposed violation specifically or conceptually?"
clem wrote:Tenshu made this allegation because he thinks, for some obscure reason, that the GPL forbids a distribution to include proprietary packages and GPL ones on the same CD. It is not clear to me what Tenshu exactly thinks or based this allegation on... and it is not clear either if Tenshu ever read the license or actually ever installed Mint to see what was inside it (for instance... he kind of assumed that ATI and Nvidia drivers were included in Linux Mint, which is not true).
Fragadelic wrote:Most licenses are very confusing and written in legal-speak.
Fragadelic wrote:As a result, they are still left up to interpretation by the individual and even a court of law would have to decide which interpretation it accepts.
Fragadelic wrote:I believe Clem is not necessarily going to include ati and nvidia drivers
Fragadelic wrote:but rather a tool to install and configure them easily from within Mint.
Fragadelic wrote:This would leave the choice up to the enduser if they want to install them or not and not force them to use them by default.
Fragadelic wrote:Codecs are a whole other ballgame.
Fragadelic wrote:As for the 3d drivers, as long as Clem just makes a tool to download install them it will be fine.
Fragadelic wrote:You can also install the codecs,etc with similar fashion but that is not the point of Mint. I think Clem wants a button or menu option that is in the line of "Setup 3D" so it is a one-stop click option.
Fragadelic wrote:You don't even have to go to apt-get as it is found in Synaptics for both nvidia and ati but they are not the latest drivers.
# Nvidia Beta driver
deb http://albertomilone.com/drivers/edgy/nonlegacy/32bit binary/
Fragadelic wrote:The question about the GPL stems from how nvidia and ati link to the kernel since the actual linking part is GPL but it links the blob through it. There is definitely some room for interpretation there since the actual piece of code between them is GPL.
Fragadelic wrote:I agree that the US patent system is a joke.
clem wrote:I always thought the Swiss flag was like the Swiss chocolate. Really nice but not big enough
Users browsing this forum: Delgesu and 9 guests