VanLUG Email Archive
> On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, Curt Sampson wrote:
>
> > Actually, it's not free code, it's GPLed. One of the things you'd
>
> GPL'ed means that it's as free as possible.
Not by a long shot. Public domain is as free as possible. Next in
line is the BSD license, and then comes the GPL.
> I believe that the GPL protects the interests of free software developers
> better than any other kind of licensing scheme, which is why many free
> software developers voluntarily place their software under this license.
>
> Making open-source freely available is only half of the battle; the other is
> preventing money-hungry software corporations from stealing the work. It's a
> joke when free software is exploited by enemies of free software.
Which is why I, for example, release my stuff under the GPL rather
than the BSD license or making it public domain. I didn't make that
decision lightly either, I knew what I wanted and made up my mind
after reading the GPL (and the LGPL).
That is not to say that I agree with all interpretations of the GPL.
Does RMS still believe that software interfaces are covered by the
GPL? That argument led to Linus's little comment at the beginning of
the GPL document distributed with the Linux source.
-- Toomas Losin ParaLynx Internet
New Westminster, BC