<quote who="Glenn Maynard" date="Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 05:10:14PM -0500"> > On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 04:18:26PM -0500, Benj. Mako Hill wrote: > > There's the possibility that we solve this problems in different ways > > for different classes of license. The AGPL might not do that now but > > maybe we can make it do that or find another license that does > > that. Maybe we have a different GPL compatible license when it comes > > to software in arcade games or toll booths? > > If you have one GPL-ish license designed for arcades, and another for toll > booths, and another for web services, then you can't use code written for > toll booths in a web service, and vice versa. That's a pratical problem, not a freedom issue. That doesn't mean it doesn't matter but the GPLv3 shows draft already shows that these sorts of pratical problems can more easily be worked around. > That's the crux of the problem: these licenses, targetting a specific > use, tend to make it impractical or impossible to use the code for a > very different purpose. Having several of them for different purposes > doesn't solve that problem. The problem right now is one of license freedom. The pratical problems you describe, while important, are another set of issues entirely. Regards, Mako -- Benjamin Mako Hill mako@debian.org http://mako.cc/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature