Re: [dwm] Freedom (was: Re: sic ipv6 patch)

From: Matthias Kirschner <>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 21:57:20 +0200

* Sander van Dijk <> [2008-05-20 18:07:53 +0200]:

> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 3:43 PM, Matthias Kirschner <> wrote:
> > Why do you think a user who gets DWM in a binary on some device knows a)
> > that this is DWM and b) knows that DWM is licensed under MIT? So this
> > user does not have the freedom to use, study, share and improve the
> > software.
> This has absolutely NOTHING to do with the licensing of the original
> product.

Why not? If the original license is GPL, they have to say that the
product includes GPLed software, and that they can get the source code
for the next three years. So the user knows about this.

> Just because someone can use it without telling others where
> it came from does NOT in any way make the original product less free.

Yes, I agree.

Best wishes,
Received on Tue May 20 2008 - 22:07:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Jul 13 2008 - 15:42:49 UTC