However, short term allows for equitable return on invested captial and risk...both essentially "stock in trade" of the internet/software business model.

And tell me that OS software returns are anywhere near zaro yet...I don't see Bill Gates standing in line to get a new Hyundai anytime soon.

All Imric is pointing out is that GPL under the 2nd license had a shot at migrating into corporate in a very large way. Seeing that has made the rabid anti-establishment folks bring up V3.

Those that are saying "tough titties" are redefining some terms to try and justify this and are rationalizing why anyone using GPL source in an enterprise to turn a profit are idiots.

Thats not his point as I read it.

His point is simply that the new version of the GPL eliminates a niche that it had carved itself in corporate America and that is a sad thing for those that would like to see closed source, monolithic corporate software development houses have some realistic competition from smaller players.

At least I think thats his point. And it has validity in my mind.

The other side that says it is well within the rights of the publisher to do this is equally correct...but that has nothing to do with Imric's dismay at the change and his reasons for said dismay.

My 2 cents.