Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 21:19:04 -0700 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> Cc: Licia <licia@o-o.org>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: reviewers for a free software license Message-ID: <4.1.19990222210441.00b6d680@mail.lariat.org> In-Reply-To: <62287.919740887@zippy.cdrom.com> References: <Your message of "Mon, 22 Feb 1999 19:36:58 MST." <4.1.19990222193349.03fc1ba0@mail.lariat.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 07:34 PM 2/22/99 -0800, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: >I'm not looking for a poison pill, I'm looking for a simple license >that anyone can use. ... >If you want >to have people stop using the GPL then it will be because you have a >BETTER license that is more ATTRACTIVE than the GPL, not because you >set out poisoned traps to eliminate any GPL people who might wander in >your direction. The point, in this case, would be to prevent code that was released under the new license from being released under the GPL. For example, if I wrote a FreeBSD device driver, I wouldn't want to see it ported to Linux and GPLed. I do not want to contribute to the base of GPLed code because I believe that the GPL is destructive. >To put it another way, it is precisely the GPL's higher degree of >attractiveness when compared to other commercial shrink-wrap licenses >that leads people to apply it to their code. That may be. They may also do it because, like most of the press, they believe that it is "the" open source software license or that it is responsible for the success of Linux. Or because they know of no other options. Or, they start with some GPLed code and so are forced to use the GPL. >Most young and >idealistic programmers just starting out in the free software biz cast >around for a license to use and generally pick the GPL simply because >it happens to be rather prominently stuck onto EMACS or GCC or some >other piece of software they're familiar with. They don't read it all >that carefully and I was one of those young and idealistic programmers >MYSELF just 20 years ago, slapping the GPL on things because it seemed >righteous and in strong opposition to the forces of proprietary evil. This case should be covered too, of course. It's not productive to do something UNattractive. >Later in life, I learned to see more subtle forms of coercion for what >they were and gravitated towards the public domain, which seemed the >most ethical of all software licenses. Unfortunately, PD doesn't >disclaim liability or handle a number of other things which are >reasonably important and so I moved on in turn to the BSD / X >Consortium style licenses, both of which have been very successful >*just as they are* but are unfortunately also not as well known. >The problem of the BSD license vs the GPL is much the same as the >problem of FreeBSD vs Linux. In many arguable ways it's a superior >way to go, but it's also poorly "marketed" and that's the greatest >area of weakness to be addressed, not the fundamental technology or >the wording of the licenses. They are just fine the way they are and >comprise our greatest asset in winning people over, not through force >but through simply being BETTER. Can we do both? I do not see the two approaches as mutually exclusive. I'd like to see a license that is attractive AND defeats the GPL's attempts to limit commercial use. That way, I'd feel comfortable releasing code under it. >The minute you try and "prevent" anything, you've lost the moral high >ground and you're right down there with RMS, trying to use the license >agreement as a mechanism for advancing a specific, limited agenda >rather than a much larger, omnidirectional one. Well, what if, 5 minutes after you release your code, someone copies it and turns it toward RMS's specific, limited agenda? I would not feal comfortable with that. I'd like to see a license that not only has no limited agenda but PRECLUDES one. In other words, an "anti-limitation" rather than a limitation. Am I making sense here? --Brett 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?4.1.19990222210441.00b6d680>