Comment They are "only" anti-GPLv3 now (Score 1) 231
I think they are merely backing up step by step. First they only supported permissive licenses, since they could take it and close it themselves. Now the next step is GPLv2, since they clearly cannot oppose it. The new things seems to be anti-GPLv3 - that is, continuing the usual software restriction business by making open source non-open via software patents.
But clearly it's a step forwards again, a forced one. And from business perspective and keeping their existing business model they are doing just the right thing, giving up only when it's absolutely necessary, while keeping their public picture as shiny as possible. I just think we are far from getting to the point that the old proprietary software houses wouldn't try to take away the freedoms of the free software by any means possible. If only the US would lead the way with evaporating software patents...
But clearly it's a step forwards again, a forced one. And from business perspective and keeping their existing business model they are doing just the right thing, giving up only when it's absolutely necessary, while keeping their public picture as shiny as possible. I just think we are far from getting to the point that the old proprietary software houses wouldn't try to take away the freedoms of the free software by any means possible. If only the US would lead the way with evaporating software patents...