🚀 go-pugleaf

mathew@mantis.co.uk (Lieutenant 030) writes:

>In <BURLEY.92Jan27133449@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
>burley@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Craig Burley) writes:
>> The "problem" with the GPL does not specifically have to do with any
>> restrictions on code protected by it.  The GPL exists specifically to
>> _ensure_ the "freedom" of the code, its source, and those using it to have
>> access to said code.

>Rubbish.  It exists specifically to ensure the "freedom" (of duplication)
>of *derivative works* based on the code, and to ensure that those using
>*derivative works* get source.

Not _specifically_, but _as well as_ the FSF code itself.
Particularly to aboid in the case where someone uses FSF code
(libraries, compiler, etc.) to write a program which he or she then
goes on to sell & limit distribution.  If you want to make money from
writing code, than use commercial products.  If you want to make the
computer-world a better place by writing code which helps people, feel
"free" to use Gnu products.  And, as RMS says in the Gnu Emacs Manual,
you should still be able to make a living supporting & customizing
your (and others) code, if you are good enough.  The GPL will help
you, in fact, since you will have access to the 'other' source in this
or a similar scenario.

>> The GPL is somewhat more restrictive than the PDL (Public Domain License)
>> because (in summary) it requires that: code protected by it cannot later be
>> protected by a more stringent/restrictive license; code protected by it
>> must be provided, or accessible, in source form.

>It also requires that code protected by it cannot later be protected by
>a LESS stringent/restrictive license, or by no license.  That restriction
>serves primarily to reduce the freedom of the code (freedom in its
>conventional sense).

Exactly...  But for the purpose of this discussion, and I am not an
expert on the GPL, isn't the only 'problem' here that you are required
to redistribute the source code if you use code covered by the GPL?

>> That doesn't mean the GPL is more restrictive in a bad sense.  It just means
>> there are people who want to release software more restricted than permitted
>> by the GPL (and perhaps even than PD), and that's really their problem, not
>> mine.

>What about the people who want to release software LESS restricted than
>permitted by the GPL?

Can you give an example of this?  The only "less" restrictive license
I can think of would be one which said that anyone who redistributes
the code can do so under any circumstances, including selling it as
their own work.  Does this benefit anyone?  Why would anyone do this?

>>      Although this sentiment might generally apply to all licenses, the GPL
>>is one that, fairly uniquely, offers (and practically ensures) freedom to the
>>code it protects and the users that use that code.

>The GPL isn't at all unique in that respect.  Software released as public
>domain is just as freely duplicatable by the users, and they're every bit
>as guaranteed to be able to get source.

Sorry, nope.  I have many megabytes of PD software around, and only
have the source code for some small portion of it (under 100 compared
to 1000's of programs), and couldn't get the source without a lot of
time and effort.  If this material was covered under the GPL, I could
get the source by asking for it, and freely modify said code for my
own use.  I might even be able to get it to run on my machine! :)

>What the GPL does uniquely is offer/ensure "freedom" (of duplication) of
>*derivative* works.

Is this a _BAD_ thing?  I don't think so...  If I want to restrict
usage of something I write, I will purchase, at my own expense,
software which will allow me to do so; to wit, a compiler and linker
package with its own header files, with which I am licensed to do
whatever I please.

	-=Alan

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
   Who, me?  Nope, I didn't say that.  Must have been my evil twin
	   Who am I? aland@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu <Alan D.>
   Where am I? Brandeis University Box 3130 Waltham, MA 02254-9110
		   When am I? 9-5, M-F, Rain-Shine
		Why am I? Whaddyawant, a philosopher?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=