Re: Social Contract
%% Mike McCarty <Mike.McCarty@sbcglobal.net> writes:
mm> Isn't that one of the claims of most people who support the use of
mm> the GPL? That, since everyone just labors on it for love, or
mm> whatever, and that the source is available, then the quality will
mm> be better?
I don't know about what "most people" claim, but that's not part of the
manifesto of the FSF or reason behind the GPL.
I haven't read this entire thread, but let me say that the primary goal
of the FSF, and the reason they created the GPL, and the reason they USE
the GPL, is in no way, shape, or form about making better quality
software. That may, or may not, be a side-effect.
Also, the FSF and GPL also aren't concerned with maximizing the freedoms
of any particular individual; if they were then obviously public domain
is the right way to go.
What the GPL is all about is maximizing the amount of available free
software (where "free" is defined by the traditional freedoms to
examine, modify, and redistribute, as discussed on the FSF's web site).
That goal means that some individual freedoms are not available, but
this isn't uncommon: there is often a trade-off between individual
freedoms, and freedom of the group in general.
mm> So, the GPL tells me what I can do with something I purchased. It
mm> tells me how I can dispose of it, and under what conditions. And
mm> discourages me from making modifications to it, because then I've
mm> got to release that, too.
If the fact that you don't want to distribute your modifications when
you distribute the "result" of your modifications is a discouragement to
you, then definitely the GPL is not for you.
The people who choose the GPL are doing so for a very specific reason:
They are not totally altruistic. They want something in return for
their work that they provide you. It's not necessarily money: instead
it's that you contribute any enhancements you make to their work back
into the commons.
If that quid pro quo is not to your liking then you should definitely
stay away from the GPL.
mm> Oh, and I've got to assign the rights to the Free Software
mm> Foundation. That's a primary point in the GPL. Because otherwise
mm> the FSF and you and whoever cannot get standing. You might
mm> investigate that part of it.
That's totally, absolutely untrue. Not even close to being true.
IF you modify a program where the FSF is the copyright holder (and there
is far more software under the GPL where the FSF is not the copyright
holder than otherwise--the Linux kernel for example), and you want to
contribute your changes back to the FSF, then yes, the FSF will ask you
to assign your copyrights before they accept the changes. This is so
there is one unambiguous copyright holder for the entire software
package.
When you do this, the FSF will send you an agreement giving you complete
freedom to use all the code you contributed in any other way you like,
under any other license you like (not anything derived from the GPL, but
if you extracted out your code and only your code).
If you don't want to do this you STILL have an alternative: you can fork
the project and provide that version (still under the GPL of course).
The copyright assignment has exactly nothing to do with the GPL. It's
solely a bookkeeping/legal protection procedure that the FSF has
instituted before it will accept changes into _ITS_ software.
mm> If the fit is good, then fine. For me, the fit is not good, so I
mm> don't use it. For people who try to make a living writing
mm> software, who are not members of the idle rich, and who cannot
mm> afford to donate a significant portion of their lives to giving
mm> away software it generally is not a good fit. One part which makes
mm> this a bad fit is that anything which the GPL touches it invades.
You are looking at this incorrectly. The FSF isn't against anyone
making money. There are many ways to make money on software that does
NOT involve using a proprietary license.
The GPL can actually _HELP_ you make money. Why do you think the MySQL
folks, the Qt folks, etc., release their stuff under the GPL?
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Smith <psmith@gnu.org> Find some GNU make tips at:
http://www.gnu.org http://make.paulandlesley.org
"Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
Reply to: