[Gllug] License debates

[Bruce Richardson]

On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 11:13:51PM +0100, salsaman wrote:
> 
> Hi Steve,
> well, if you want some big company to be able to take your work, rip it
> off, and not give anything back, then the BSD license is ideal for you.
> Microsoft for example, loves the BSD license, and would probably encourage
> you to use it.
> 
> On the other hand, if you want to guarantee freedom for all future users,
> then use the GPL.

I really don't view that as a helpful contribution.  Most of the various
open source licenses have advantages and disadvantages.  The GPL imposes
some restrictions (i.e restricts freedom) on what can be done with code
after it has been released under the license, in the belief that this is
necessary to protect other freedoms; some see this as an irreconcilable
contradiction, others see it as a necessary compromise.

Many of those who support the use of GPL 2 are alarmed at the
prescriptive (even dictatorial) trends of the GNU Free Documentation
license and GPL 3.  Linus Torvalds and most of the Debian Project are in
that camp; where do they fit into your black-and-white universe?

Admirers of the BSD license often say that it is more free because it
imposes fewer restrictions.  When others say "Microsoft can profit from
your code", the response has been "So Microsoft's users get the benefit
of better code.  What's the big deal?"  It's a point of view.

-- 
Bruce

I see a mouse.  Where?  There, on the stair.  And its clumsy wooden
footwear makes it easy to trap and kill.  -- Harry Hill
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/gllug/attachments/20070227/79e86d74/attachment.pgp>
-------------- next part --------------
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug