Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov <sena@hurd.homeunix.org> wrote:
> Peter S Galbraith wrote:
>
> > But this is _GPL'ed_ software which seems to be doing quite well without
> > sacrificing its license for more market share. You can't possibly argue
>
> GPL takes away some freedoms. Can you argue this point? If not, then why
> are you using GPL? GPL makes barbecue from your cow. If you do not want to
> trade your freedom, you should not use GPL.
The GPL takes away the "freedom" to redistribute works as closed sources
or unmodifiable. But it enforces the freedoms we want. It protects the
developer from other developers redistributing work that cannot be used
by the initial developer. It protects the user by giving them the right
to fork the code if something happens to the developer.
The GFDL lets other developers redistribute a fork that cannot be folded
back upstream by giving them the tool of using a poison pill (invariant
section). The GFDL does not add any protection or freedom for the users
compared to the GPL.
> > Are are implying that I am against the GPL? If so, read what I said
> > over again.
>
> Are you implying that I am against the freedom? If so, read what I said
> over again.
If I understand correctly, you don't mind trading some aspects of
freedom which we consider crucial in exchange for something that you
think will buy market share. This is off-topic and pointless.
Peter
Reply to: