Future availability of Ubuntu and other Linux distros

[wpshooter]

What is there to prevent (in the future, when Ubuntu may become a threat), Microsoft or whoever from making a multi-billion dollar offer to the right parties, so that they would abondon their development and support of Ubuntu and/or other Linux operating systems ??? In other words, if you can't beat them BUY them !!!

Is there something in either the licensing or general law that prevents something like this from happening ?

Thanks.

 

[P0ldy]

Well, the GNU GPL which nearly all Linux distros follow (I can't think of one that doesn't) is still covered under copyright law but makes specific requirements and additions to copyright law, such as the GPL must be included in any program that is being redistributed by someone/company, allowing the program to be copied or have its source viewed or etc. Microsoft couldn't just take a snapshot of X distro and make improvements and close it off to the community, lest it violate the GPL. Moreover, most Linux distributions are community-driven, so it isn't as easy as purchasing a company's version of Linux. Nevertheless, Red Hat's source is still open, and if Microsoft bought Red Hat then the distro's source itself would still be accessible.

The BSD license on the other hand does not protect against what you're talking about, although no company can still really "buy" the community behind each OS. But, for example, OSX is based on BSD Mach kernel. And I've heard though am not certain that Microsoft's IP stack is basically the BSD stack.

 

[wpshooter]

Originally posted by: P0ldy
Well, the GNU GPL which nearly all Linux distros follow (I can't think of one that doesn't) is still covered under copyright law but makes specific requirements and additions to copyright law, such as the GPL must be included in any program that is being redistributed by someone/company, allowing the program to be copied or have its source viewed or etc.

That says basically that they can not prevent it from being distributed but does it have anything that would specifically bar Microsoft from making a CONTRACT with KEY personnel involved in the development and support of a distribution(s) to agree for renumeration to NOT have any future participation in the development and support of said distribution(s) ?

Thanks.

 

[pkme2]

The purpose of GNU is to be free. http://www.gnu.org/
and GPL http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.html

Ubuntu is not for sale to the highest bidder.
http://www.ubuntu.com/
So any sale of Ubuntu or any possibility of being sold is ludicrous.

 

[P0ldy]

Originally posted by: wpshooter
That says basically that they can not prevent it from being distributed

The GPL does not aim to PREVENT it from being distributed, it actively ENCOURAGES it.

but does it have anything that would specifically bar Microsoft from making a CONTRACT with KEY personnel involved in the development and support of a distribution(s) to agree for renumeration to NOT have any future participation in the development and support of said distribution(s) ?

I think you meant remuneration. And no, the GPL is a software license and not a contractual agreement on what individuals do in their daily lives, and makes no provisions on an individual's future decisions. The corporate world's analogous "non-disclosure agreement", which is essentially what you're asking, does not exist in the GPL.

There is nothing to stop Microsoft from buying every single developer on every single Linux distribution (not to mention every program), except the fact that that would mean thousands upon thousands upon thousands of people from all across the world, many of whom already have a job and work on a distribution on their own time, and many of whom have philosophical disagreements with Microsoft, Sun, etc. Furthermore, the programs themselves would still be open for any aspiring programmer to take a look at and tweak.

You may want to give a quick read to the GNU Manifesto and the GNU GPL. Most of the language contained therein and the explanation of "free software" should give you a clearer picture of the philosophy of GNU.

 

[wpshooter]

Originally posted by: pkme2
The purpose of GNU is to be free. http://www.gnu.org/
and GPL http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.html

Ubuntu is not for sale to the highest bidder.
http://www.ubuntu.com/
So any sale of Ubuntu or any possibility of being sold is ludicrous.

Thanks for your reply. As you can probably imagine, I certainly do NOT want the developement and support of this O/S to be abondoned. But if you have been around very long, you are probably well aware of the incentive that MONEY can be.

And, of course, the reason I pose this question is because I and many others would be VERY unhappy if we spent our time and efforts in using this O/S to subsequently find out that we had had the rug pulled from under our feet.

Thanks.

 

[Nothinman]

In other words, if you can't beat them BUY them !!!

Buy who? Canonical? Novell? RedHat? Sun? Kernel developers? Gnome developers? KDE developers?

And, of course, the reason I pose this question is because I and many others would be VERY unhappy if we spent our time and efforts in using this O/S to subsequently find out that we had had the rug pulled from under our feet.

Can't happen, even if MS buys a distribution they can't release it under a closed license without consent from every single copyright holder on the product and that's nearly impossible. Hell with regards to the Linux kernel it is impossible since some of the copyright holders are huge GPL zealots and some are even dead.

Sure MS could kill off a brand like Ubuntu or RedHat, but the software itself will remain.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: wpshooter
What is there to prevent (in the future, when Ubuntu may become a threat), Microsoft or whoever from making a multi-billion dollar offer to the right parties, so that they would abondon their development and support of Ubuntu and/or other Linux operating systems ??? In other words, if you can't beat them BUY them !!!

Is there something in either the licensing or general law that prevents something like this from happening ?

Thanks.

Nothing, but then anyone could step in and take over to move the platform forward.