Why this topic isn't going to go away (Score 1)

Why should our governments contribute to closed-source development? It doesn't benefit their citizens

Government investments are often justified as adding in some meaningful way to the economy as measured by GDP and other economic statistics. Proprietary software lives up to this expectation - it can be sold, it has value. How can the "product" of GPL software be quantified in such a way as to add to these statistics? If it can't, then spending $1 billion on free software is equivalent in monetary policy terms to burning $1 billion.

Governments care greatly about the economy, and there's no other way to measure it. If GDP falls, we are said to be in recession. When it rises, we're in a boom. So if the people in government believe the conventional wisdom that they can best serve their fellow citizens by continuing GDP (and tax base) growth, then they are forced to accept Allchin's argument on GPL. Allchin could even go farther in this logic by blaming some of the current economic slowdown on the increased "destruction" of property caused by the recent growth of Linux.

Well, at least in regards to it being an "intellectual property" destroyer. Intellectual property, for Stallman, is the commoditizing of information, which the GPL exists to prevent. So, I don't think he'll object to the statement, what he (and I) object to, is the rather flawed conclusion that this clarification makes.

Yes, but where is the flaw? America and capitalism are synonymous. Commoditizing information is commoditizing work product. While I think you have a strong point to make, many in this community enjoy a comfortable lifestyle due to success in the capitalist system. Take a look at the passionate discussions on this board about Napster. If it is proven that the growth of GPL crashes markets and lays off workers, many will question their support of it. This could be a big, long fight.