Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian

[mru@kth.se (Måns Rullgård)]

Roland Mas <lolando@debian.org> writes:

>> I have a suspicion that most people that publish their programs
>> under the GPL use the GPL only because it's the license they've
>> heard of the most, without really considering all the implications.
>> I'd like to see a bit more of a discussion on these matters, so
>> people would realize that the GPL perhaps isn't as "free" as it's
>> advocates want it to look like.
>
>   I have a strong feeling that this used to be the case, three years
> ago.  But no more.  I believe that nowadays, people writing free
> software are aware of the implications of their choice,

I thought the exact implications were subject to considerable
controversy.

> and they choose the GPL willingly, knowingly and deliberately.
> There have been numerous articles published both for and against the
> GPL, and I think most software authors have read at least one of
> them.  I'm pretty sure people do read the GPL before using it for
> their programs, and I trust them to understand what it says.

Is there such a thing as understanding a legal document?  It's easy to
fall into the trap of believing everyday, sensible logic would be
apply in legal matters.  Unfortunately, it doesn't.

> Especially when it's the subject of many controversies and FUD.
>
>   Now your argument about what constitutes a derived work is worthy of
> consideration.

Does anyone have any pointers to previous discussions on that matter?

-- 
Måns Rullgård
mru@kth.se