🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <696@eedsp.eedsp.gatech.edu> baud@eedsp.eedsp.gatech.edu
(Kurt Baudendistel) writes:

>Maybe FSF should change its name to the Unencumbered Software Foundation
>(coined by manis@cs.ubc.ca (Vincent Manis)) so that there is no more
>confusion on this topic?

I must respectfully decline the honour. I didn't coin this phrase
(though I like it a lot: it reminds me that, according to Jonathan
Swift, the Laputans were engaged in a product to extract light from
cucumbers. Next to that, the zaniest software licence is common sense). 

However, there are two views of unencumbrance [sic]: either you can do
with the code what you want, or you cannot prevent a customer from doing
with the code what s/he wants. Those who decry the GPL subscribe to the
first view, while FSF argues for the second. There have certainly been
times when I refused to use an FSF product for something because of the
licence agreement, but there have been many more times when I have used
their products in the way that the GPL specifies. Does being able to see
both sides of the issue make me a wimp?



--
\    Vincent Manis <manis@cs.ubc.ca>      "There is no law that vulgarity and
 \   Department of Computer Science      literary excellence cannot coexist."
 /\  University of British Columbia                        -- A. Trevor Hodge
/  \ Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1W5 (604) 228-2394