No subject

free but can't copy/reuse is just as proprietary as any old map from
teleatlas.

> Apple was in a similar situation. They chose to use freebsd (a
> PD-style OS). They use it in the underlying layers of Macosx. They are
> one of the most vicious, control-freak companies you'll find these
> days. Even though they don't have to, they contribute heaps of code
> back to freebsd.
> 
> Given that apple was never going to open-source all of macosx, what
> would you rather they do?
> 
> Is freebsd worse off because apple uses their product? No. Its much
> much better off.

That is a false dichotomy. You are assuming that there are only two
possible outcomes : apple using pd-freebsd or apple not using freebsd.
The thirth option is apple using gpl-freebsd and having to contribute
much more than they actually do. When comparing the current situation
with that scenario we are much worse off.

If you think Apple wouldn't do that just look at webkit. I am quite
convinced that had that one been pd they would just have forked it and
never looked back...

cu bart