🚀 go-pugleaf

edguer@ces.cwru.edu (Aydin Edguer) writes:
>rcd@raven.eklektix.com (Dick Dunn) writes:
...
>> BSD code doesn't use copyleft (as illustrated in your earlier example),
>> and CSRG has given specific reasons for not using it.
...
>First, CSRG would not have had so many problem with trying to get an AT&T
>free /bin/csh [and other pieces] if they had used the GPL in the first place.

That's not clear.  I believe at the time the csh hassle began, CSRG was
just beginning to figure out what it would mean to have code not "contami-
nated" by AT&T--with concerns about both presence of AT&T code inside csh
and contributions to csh from people who had seen AT&T code.  It seems that
the "detox" situation is clearer and simpler today.  It would be interesting
to hear what the CSRG folks think about this.  [Note that putting GPL on a
piece of code is a claim, not a statement of fact--AT&T could still have
disputed it.  But we can't know what might have happened.]

>Second, CSRG does use copylefted code - they are using gcc [among other
>pieces].

Yes, and that's good, but I think it's a separate issue from what they're
doing with "their" code.  They're being more pragmatic than dogmatic--if
code is not encumbered in a way which prevents further distribution, they
can use it.  They have a different criterion for the sort of copyright/
redistribution right they want to put on their own stuff.  This seems like
a constructive approach--you don't have to agree completely with people in
order to share work with them.

>Third, CSRG hopes that vendors will pick up their code and use it
>commercially.  But this use can also lead to a great deal of friction
>when a contributor to the effort was trying to advance *free* BSD and
>find their work used commercially - as you know from the BSD BOF at
>USENIX where Bill Jolitz got rather upset...

The incident at USENIX is not much related to free code vs commercial use.
It is more related to things like delays in bringing things together,
timing of BSD releases, and (let us be honest) clashing personalities of
strong-willed people.  It would be difficult to understand the situation
from only what you saw at USENIX.

>...Maybe Bill should have
>used the GPL on his code?

If you'd like to get an idea of how Bill might feel about copyleft, see Dr
Dobb's Journal, April 1991, pp. 36-37, "Brief Notes: Copyrights, Copylefts,
and Competitive Advantage".  (This is a sidebar by Lynne Jolitz to a
series by Lynne and Bill Jolitz on porting BSD to the 386.)  It has very
little positive to say about copyleft.
-- 
Dick Dunn    rcd@raven.eklektix.com   -or-   raven!rcd    Boulder, Colorado
	...Simpler is better.