Reply to comment

Oh, I completely understand, and even agree with, the terms of the GPL. I know what intends and I see what it has achieved. And I completely understand the sort of "karmic return on investment" that it attempts to quantify and subsequently guarantee through its execution.

I just don't believe that is the sole motive for Sun's actions. Not by a long shot. Sun is a for-profit company that has a fiduciary responsibility to SUNW shareholders. Given away the shop's contents for the good of the world's soul doesn't make business sense.

My point is only that the GPL is an awesome tool for a corporate entity to guarantee "openness" in usage of their technology up to the point where a second corporate entity decides that their use of said technology is so valuable they want to pay for it not to be open.

The GPL is the ultimate "try before you buy" business tool; "you can sample as much as you want for free until you actually want to make money, then you either need to figure out how to make money while giving your tech away (which some *have* done successfully, though rare) or pay up, buster".

I'll bet you a beer -- yeah, free as in beer :) -- that one of two things happen in the next year. (1) someone cuts a custom licensing deal with someone such that that person or company has a non-GPL license exception for GPL'd Sun technology or (2) that some corporate entity "releases" news that Sun killed their business by denying 'em such a deal (and, yeah, (2) is a bit loose -- how about limiting it to a press release to that effect?).

(Oh, boy. I answered the math question wrong. Hopefully there isn't a log of that.)