On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 10:59:04AM +0200, Keith Dunwoody wrote: > Glenn Maynard wrote: > >On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 10:19:08AM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote: > > > >>>More generally, that rationale is bogus because it applies to almost > >>>*all* > >>>restrictions in any license. The GPL discriminates against proprietary > >>>software authors. > >> > >>No, it does not. (It makes it impossible for propietary software authors > >>to enrich their software with the copyleft software. But when this is > >>discrimination, so is giving away free t-shirts, as there are people who > >>do not like clothes). > > > > > >Sorry, but that didn't make any sense at all. There's no relationship > >between a license forbidding use of code in the endeavor of writing > >proprietary software, and a person choosing not to accept something > >because of personal preference. > > > > I think this is the link: Some people (software companies) prefer not to > license their code under the GPL, therefore they reject using GPL'd code. > Other people prefer to not wear clothes, therefore they reject free > t-shirts. I strongly advise you not investigate this too closely. These two clauses in the DFSG really *are* ambiguous, and you are expected to exercise understanding when applying them. Attempting to find a brightline test will only result in lengthly circular arguments; there isn't one. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
pgpzfERyLIPqH.pgp
Description: PGP signature