Re: GPL is not the only free licence, and FSF not the only holder
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, John Lines wrote:
> By being the first, and most frequently mentions Free Software license the GPL
Survey says...Bzzzt! The GPL is a latecomer in the free software arena.
> has become the best known. Most authors of free software are not as interested
> in licensing as the members of this debate. They just stick some words about
> the GPL somewhere, often dont bother with including a copy in their source
> distribution, and get on with the interesting coding part.
They don't have to: you only need the text of the GPL to copy, not to
originate.
> I am sure many of these authors would be just as happy with the Artistic
> license
> if they thought it would give them less hassle.
Nothing's stopping them--I see no gun-wielding hordes forcing the GPL on
authors.
> In addition the copyright has been assigned to FSF in only a small number of
> cases. It may be that, to save wasted intellectual effort from all concerned,
> the maintainers of packages where copyright has been assigned to the FSF should
> include a copy of the GPL in those packages
> (as an indication of willingness to maintain good relations with the copyright
> holder - rather than as a precedent)
>
> This would free up the FSF lawyers to look at more interesting questions, such
> as,
> if I am installing 20 servers with RedHat Linux, how many copies do I need to
> buy ?
Zero. It might help if you actually READ the GPL... Toto, I've got a
feeling we're not in Redmond anymore...
> (Note that replies on RedHat licensing are off topic for Debian Policy, so
> mail solely on that direct to me only please)
So is unsupportable idiocy: thus your entire missive was OT...
> John Lines
>
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
--
<a mailto:galt@inconnu.isu.edu>Who is John Galt?</a>
Failure is not an option. It comes bundled with your Microsoft product.
-- Ferenc Mantfeld
Reply to: