Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 08:59:49 +0100 From: Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be> To: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen), Jeremy Karlson <karlj000@unbc.ca> Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: GPL nonsense: time to stop Message-ID: <a05101006b84748e23040@[10.0.1.48]> In-Reply-To: <b2itb2y1nh.tb2@localhost.localdomain> References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0112190048271.29122-100000@ugrad.unbc.ca> <b2itb2y1nh.tb2@localhost.localdomain>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 8:08 PM -0800 on 2001/12/19, Gary W. Swearingen wrote: > Please tell us how the GPL restricts the ability of someone to do > something "proprietary" any more than the BSD licence does (or the MIT > license, which I suppose RMS knew before creating the GPL, does)? > I don't think you can, because that isn't the point of the GPL. Simple. If you do a project based on code that uses the GPL, you do not have the option of withholding your source code. If you do a project based on code that uses the BSDL, then you *do* have the option of withholding your source code. It doesn't get much simpler than that. > No, the real point of the GPL is to encourage someone to DO something > "proprietary". In what possible way could the GPL ever be construed to do anything remotely resembling this?!? > Namely, to encourage (to put it politly -- better might be "coerce" or > "force" or "bully") people (those wishing to save time and money by > reusing some or all of the GPL'd code in their own creation) to withhold > the results of their work from closed (and to a lesser extent non-GPL > open) software developers. Uh, could you re-state that please? This is about as clear as a black hole. I'll try to re-state this by copying your words and leaving out the parentheses, and see if we come up with anything that makes any kind of sense: Namely, to encourage people to withhold the results of their work from closed software developers. Okay, I guess in a perverse sort of way, this could potentially be construed to "encourage someone to DO something 'proprietary'", insofar as it allows someone to prevent their code being used by closed-source developers. However, I believe that the use of the word "proprietary" in this context was intended to mean "closed-source", which then makes a real hash of your claim. If you want to get pedantic with the use of certain words, that's fine. But if you do so, please label your message appropriately, so that the rest of us can just trash it and go on to other messages with real content. The simple fact is that the BSDL allows someone to do a closed-source (i.e., "proprietary") project based on it, while the GPL does not. I don't think that anyone could possibly disagree with this statement. -- Brad Knowles, <brad.knowles@skynet.be> H4sICIFgXzsCA2RtYS1zaWcAPVHLbsMwDDvXX0H0kkvbfxiwVw8FCmzAzqqj1F4dy7CdBfn7 Kc6wmyGRFEnvvxiWQoCvqI7RSWTcfGXQNqCUAnfIU+AT8OZ/GCNjRVlH0bKpguJkxiITZqes MxwpSucyDJzXxQEUe/ihgXqJXUXwD9ajB6NHonLmNrUSK9nacHQnH097szO74xFXqtlbT3il wMsBz5cnfCR5cEmci0Rj9u/jqBbPeES1I4PeFBXPUIT1XDSOuutFXylzrQvGyboWstCoQZyP dxX4dLx0eauFe1x9puhoi0Ao1omEJo+BZ6XLVNaVpWiKekxN0VK2VMpmAy+Bk7ZV4SO+p1L/ uErNRS/qH2iFU+iNOtbcmVt9N16lfF7tLv9FXNj8AiyNcOi1AQAA To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?a05101006b84748e23040>