Re: Nvidia and its choice to read the GPL "differently"

[Giacomo A. Catenazzi]

Richard Stallman wrote:
>     Great.  So not only is there no legal need to cite GNU in the Linux 
>     name, there is no ethical obligation either.
> 
> When you take part of my statement, stretch it, interpret it based on
> assumptions you know I disagree with, and present the result as
> something I said, that doesn't prove anything.  It is childish.
> 
> There is no ethical obligation to mention secondary contributions
> incorporated in a large project.  There ethical obligation is to cite
> the main developer.  In the GNU/Linux system, the GNU Project is the
> principal contributor; the system is more GNU than anything else,
> and we started it.

GNU is not so important in new system. I take gcc and glibc as to be
outside the GNU project. (they have now the GNU mark only for GNU
convenience, IMHO) I use "GNU/Linux" only to make more explicit the
"copyleft" ideas, but surelly not because of the GNU tools.

If you insist with such arguments, you risk that someone will rewrite
the basic GNU tools outside the GNU project (emacs is not an OS main tool,
gcc and glibc are de facto outside GNU) (bash will remain GNU ?)

ciao
	giacomo

RMS: maybe you can reply me privatly about some more explication of your mail,
so less OT mail, and privately maybe I can understand more about GNU/Linux flames.