The Linux Foundation: Not a Friend of Desktop Linux, the GPL, or Openness
I don&#x27;t know enough about this to take sides but I do think that the author of this piece is being a bit misleading on at least one point. This piece says:<p>&gt; <i>... Greg Olson [referred] to the GPL and other copyleft licenses as “Restrictive Licenses” and “viral.”</i><p>The original article, which he then quoted, reads:<p>&gt; <i>These licenses are often termed ‘viral’ because ...</i><p>So, while Mr. Olson <i>did</i> use the term &quot;viral&quot; in his piece, <i>he</i> didn&#x27;t specifically call them &quot;viral&quot;. Instead, he said, quite literally, that &quot;these licenses are often termed &#x27;viral&#x27;&quot; (and they are).<p>Anyways, the open source world has been having this argument forever -- often in the form of whether the BSD v. GPL is more &quot;free&quot; -- and it all depends on whose point of view you&#x27;re looking at it from (the developer&#x27;s or the user&#x27;s).