"Jeremy Sliwinski (mailing list account)" <listbox@unix-boy.com> writes:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
>>> And that is the problem. It assumes that the right of people to
>>> access code is greater than the author's right to their work.
>>
>> Many people don't see that as a problem.
>
> That's because most GPL users aren't writing or developing software,
> so they simply ignore that issue because they benefit from it.
I'm a GPL user and a GPL programmer. In this case, I would say “Let the
market decide”. If that many programmers felt the way you do, they
wouldn't create or modify GPL software and Linux, Gnome, Java, MySQL,
Emacs, GCC, etc would either cease to exist or would never have been
licensed under the GPL in the first place.
In fact, many programmers, myself included, and corporations see the
advantage of the GPL over the BSD for creating and releasing software.
We *want* the viral effects of the GPL. Its why we use it. If you
don't like them, you are not obligated to modify our software. And if
you don't like the viral effects, I'm sure you won't want to build on it
— but you can still use it and enjoy more legal freedom than you could
with any proprietary software.
In the end, why worry about the GPL? As a programmer, no one is forcing
you to modify GPLed software. Even if your job requires you to modify
GPLed software, you enjoy more rights than if you had just done a
straight work-for-hire programming job.
How does the GPL harm programmers who don't want its viral effects to
affect their software?
Mark.
___________________
Nolug mailing list
nolug@nolug.org
Received on 12/12/08
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 12/19/08 EST