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

Re: why is graphviz package non-free?

Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:

> Brian Thomas Sniffen <bts@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> Should this be considered free?  I can't see it as free.  It's very
>> clear that recipients are being charged for the ability to modify the
>> software.  They aren't on a plane with the original author.  This is a
>> root problem similar to that of the FSF's shenanigans with GFDL and
>> GPL'd text, and the reason I object to their use of the GFDL: when
>> only a copyright holder can do some things, that's non-Free.
> How does providing extra freedoms to certain recipients decrease the
> freeness of a piece of software? Software under the GPL is free.

It doesn't.  Requiring that others release more freedom in a mutual
work than you will release is non-free.

> Software under the BSD license is free. Software that is sometimes under
> one and sometimes under another ought to still be free.

It is.  But software under a "you get GPL-like rights to my parts of
this thing we're building together, and I get BSD-like rights to your
parts" license is not free.


Brian Sniffen                                       bts@alum.mit.edu

Reply to: