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

Re: Why is choice of venue non-free ?

Glenn L McGrath <bug1@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> Its debating "user freedom" vs "free software developers freedom", to
> argue one is more valuable than the other is a chicken and egg argument.

It's trying to balance the original developer's rights against
derived work developer's rights too. I've been writing mostly
derived works so far this year. It really wouldn't be good for
me to have to specify that all court cases have to be on the
other side of the world, which I think I would have to do if a
copyleft licence had choice of venue. From previous comments
about licences that can't be defended, I guess one could say
that my work would be meaninglessly licensed unless I accepted
having to pay the CoV cost introduced by the original developer.

It seems like a *great* way to call something "free software" and
yet stop all but the richest developers working with it.

> Id prefer to drop the whole argument at this point, you have made your
> position clear, i didnt intend it to get this heavy.

Didn't you start this thread? You asked a question, but really
wanted to argue about the answer. It would probably have been
less heavy if you had put out your stall at the off.

Reply to: