heh… 'tards. GPL is a pox on the face of the earth. The best thing that could happen is for GPL to have to go to court, and lose.

I don’t see why any commercial firm would want to touch the GPL with anything other than a 80 meter pole. Remember the VLC on iOS fiasco?

It seems to me that this kind of thing is exactly what is meant by “the GPL is a cancer.”

I really hope that fosstards will go after Google this time and get “see ya, thanks for playing” in response. It’s time for all “friends” to buy a clue: all this “Google loves free software!!!” ranting had to stop long ago.

GPL: We’re not viral. Honest™.

This is the kind of all talk, no action that I 've come to expect from the freetard camp.

Instead of whining about companies making proprietary firmwares out of Android, why don’t they make their own phones? Or why don’t they make their own replacements for the non-open parts of Android?

Lazy freetards…

Also, it’s precisely the kind of internal feuds and political infighting I 've come to expect from the freetard camp.

Hey freetards, here is an advice:

If you have an open source product that’s doing rather well, shut up and don’t start nitpicking on GPL violations or suddenly start demanding more and more (“force all Android developers to open source their code!!!”)

Especially when android is starting to feel the hot breath of WebOS and WP7 on it’s back.

As a Chlorus said, after this incident, no company will touch the GPL, not even with a 80 meter pole.

I still haven’t understood why glibc would be fix the issue. I mean, bionic is BSD licensed, and both BSD and LGPL are GPL compatible, aren’t they?

So what would be the advantage of glibc?

@ChrisTX

The problem with Bionic is that it contains pieces of GPL code (or at least, that is what it was claimed), and hence it was wrong of Google to license it under BSD, they should have licensed it under GPL. So, Google is now forced to re-license Bionic it as GPL. Which, of course, would require all developers who used Bionic code to develop apps to re-license their stuff under GPL too.

Moving to glibc which is a BSD licensed software and contains no GPL code inside would solve the problem for future apps, but not for apps that have already being made and released (using bionic).

TL;DR:
Screw GPL and all the rest of Stallman’s minefield. Just lay your hands on whatever BSD code you can, make what you want to make and then release it either as a binary only (free or paid) or under a BSD license.
This is what Apple does, and 1) they don’t have any legal woes and 2) they are out there kicking ass and taking names.

But I thought if you linked GPL code it was fine as long as it’s GPL compatible, or did I get that wrong?

I mean, LGPL isn’t GPL either.

“But I thought if you linked GPL code it was fine as long as it’s GPL compatible, or did I get that wrong?

I mean, LGPL isn’t GPL either.”

Is it even worth the effort of analyzing it? Both GPL and LGPL are crafted in such way that they are literal minefields if you have the slightest commercial intention for your app. Even if that intention is something as subtle as providing an SDK or selling support. Look at what RedHat is going through.

I would LOVE IT if Google came out tommorow and said “we re-eveluated our strategy and came to the conclusion that the GPL sucks, from now own, all of our projects will be made freely available to phone manufacturers, but under an NDA. Android is officially dead and we are creating GoogleMobileOS instead”.

What would the freetards do? Cry Google a river?

Releasing the code is a FAVOR Google did to the open source camp, not an obligation (they could have invested in a BSD instead, like apple did, and contribute nothing back).

However, the freetards treated Google as if it was their obligation.

Moral lesson: The better you treat freetards, the worse they will treat you back. Be like Apple, and treat them bad. Don’t be like Google, look what it got them.

yawn

More FUD on the “FUD Tracker”.

Oh, I get it now.

F**king hypocrisy.

The FSF needs to know that Android ain’t Linux! sits on chair stares at

His comments are hilarious. Courts have previously ruled that interfaces are not copyrightable. That’s exactly what function signatures and structures are. Freetard salivating at the idea of forcing a major software stack to be open source, news at 11.