Re: SGI releases IA64 C C++ and F90 compiler under GPL

[Joe Buck <jbuck at racerx dot synopsys dot com>]

> > Cygnus has _nothing_ to do this this requirement, it is strictly the
> > FSF's requirement.

Linus Torvalds writes:
> Hmm.. So the only real political problem is that nobody wants to offend
> rms and the FSF?

Forget politics, we're talking solid pragmatic reasons.  RMS has spent the
last 15 years talking to lawyers (not just any lawyers, law professors
with considerable expertise in the subject) about this stuff, you haven't
to anywhere near the same extent, if at all.

So far Linux has lucked out: no one has forced you to remove major chunks
of the kernel or gotten a cease and desist order against Linux because
someone wasn't careful enough.  How do you know you have the right to
distribute all of the Linux code?  Because people send it to you by email?
Don't you know that most US programmers have employment contracts saying
the company owns everything they do even on their own time if it's even
vaguely related to what the company does?  (Don't look at your own
contract, Transmeta gave you a special deal).

Do you have paperwork and tracking for every little bit of Linux?  This
wouldn't matter in a friendly, cooperative world, but we aren't in one.
Free software has enemies, and those enemies have lawyers.  Maybe we'll
continue to luck out, and then we can conclude that RMS has been overly
cautious.  But let's look at the history: there was the AT&T vs UC/BSDI
lawsuit (you know, the reason anyone has heard of you today), the Unipress
action that forced a rewrite of part of GNU Emacs.  Probably the worst
that would happen is that some device driver would have to be ripped out.
But what if it were something more fundamental?

Now, of course, the FSF could decide it's safe to have SGI as a co-owner.
But what about UCITA?  This appears to allow SGI to revoke their word
and take their code proprietary at any time in the future, and require
everyone who has a copy to delete it!  SGI's current management likes
free software/open source.  What if they have a few bad quarters and get
booted?  You can never trust a corporation's word if you don't have a
binding legal contract, because even if the CEO is an honest guy, he's
subject to removal at any time.