Mark A. Hershberger wrote:
> Fine, lets not say you have “Freedom” under the GPL.
Now if only the FSF would make the same statement regarding the GPL...
> Instead, how about this:
>
> Software covered by the GPL permits you to gain access to the source
> code for the software.
>
> Of course, there is more:
>
> If you agree to distribute the source code to any modifications you
> make, the GPL allows you to distribute modified versions of the
> software.
>
> Where in this agreement was anyone “forced” to do anything? The person
> modifying the software *gained* the ability to modify the software when
> they agreed to distribute the source to their modifications. They did
> not have that right before.
And that is fine. If you agree to it, that is your decision. I don't
agree to that agreement, ergo I don't submit patches or enhancements.
If you are going to tell me how I have to treat or license the work that
I spend my time on, you don't deserve it. I just disagree with the
coercive nature of the GPL and find it ironic that the GPL is equated
with anything being "free" (as in freedom, not free beer).
J
___________________
Nolug mailing list
nolug@nolug.org
Received on 12/15/08
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 12/19/08 EST