[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: The Show So Far

* Glenn Maynard <g_deb@zewt.org> [030313 06:15]:
> People who develop GPL code do so with the understanding that nobody can
> take that code and make it proprietary.  This is the fundamental, basic,
> ultimate reason people use the GPL instead of less restrictive licenses.

But we (at least I) also do so because we do want our users to
have freedom to use it properly. That's the the fundamental reason to
prefer it over something less free. (Why allowing people charging money
for it, or use it in a buisness, or use it for military purposes, all
not really needed, though we allow it)

> This is what is undermined by the RPC loophole.  The value of their
> modifications doesn't justify circumvention of the GPL premeses--just
> the opposite, it makes the circumvention that much more of a problem.

They do not circumvent GPL in any real sense of the word. They just
use their freedom to run on their computers what they want to the

> > Surely the carrot -- allowing free developers to improve the software instead 
> > of having to bear all development costs on yourself -- is adequate to 
> > encourage release, without the stick.
> If we believed this, then we would all be using BSD licenses, not GPL.
> The GPL is written with the express belief that this is not true.

I think there is some confusion here. While GPL forces the freedom to
fully use the program (and thus the source) to follow the binary, the
given argument is normaly seen as enough incentive to release anything
at all.

> If you believe that there's no need to force people to release source,
> then you're not arguing against this case specifically, you're arguing
> against using the GPL at all.  (That is, this seems to be a BSD-instead-
> of-GPL argument.)

It's not about releasing source. It's about letting something out at

> So are you going to release under a BSD-ish license, then?  Why force
> people to release source through legal means if you don't really need to?

Because I want the source of programs I get or buy and want others to
have the same possibility with programs I wrote?

  Bernhard R. Link

Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing
an editor and a MTA.

Reply to: