Re: [dev] GPL free Linux

From: Alessandro Pistocchi <apukfreelance_AT_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2018 12:03:34 +0100

Hi all, first of all apologies.

My email clearly did not attract much of your interest and you generally did not like it.

Let me answer the best that I can to your emails.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 12 Nov 2018, at 11:29, Anthony J. Bentley <anthony_AT_anjbe.name> wrote:
>
> Hadrien Lacour writes:
>>> On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 09:43:12PM -0700, Anthony J. Bentley wrote:
>>> Markus Wichmann writes:
>>>> Why would you do something so pointless? First of all, licences only
>>>> matter if you plan on redistribution, so most here won't care. Second,
>>>> all the GPL demands is that you distribute the source, which any good
>>>> distribution should do, anyway, right?
>>>
>>> GPL also demands that you not combine the code with GPL-incompatible
>>> terms, even if those terms are free themselves. A ridiculous requirement
>>> that violates the spirit and practice of free software.
>>>

That is one big reason why I want to do it.

>>
>> Even if this discussion is pointless, I'll humour the list; attacking the
>> methods and not the goal (which is to eradicate proprietary software) without
>> proposing an alternative methode is at best fallacious.
>
> The obvious alternative is to use one of the many decades-old licenses
> that do in fact allow code to be combined with practically any other
> reasonable license. Eradicating proprietary software is far more effort
> than it's worth, whereas making it irrelevant is eminently achievable.

That is something I completely agree with.

I thought I wrote in my email that I am ok with GPL executables. Not with libraries though.

The problem I have is that people are getting a bit crazy with GPL3 in my opinion and it could even get worse in the future, to the point that you may find yourself in the position of not even being able to use some essential libs due to licensing.

>
>> On the other hand, I'd like to ask why would someone use a non copylefted
>> license? Almost all the time (especially for applications, not libraries), th
>> e
>> main reason is intellectual masturbation, not a concrete goal like GPL's one.
>
> The reason I use non-copyleft licenses is so every person and project
> using other free licenses can use, copy, modify, and distribute my code.
>

I agree with again: copyleft is a bit of a virus and it does not really give people freedom and choice.

In my opinion, it gives them a new religion to believe in and as long as people believe in it, it gives them freedom and choice.
Received on Mon Nov 12 2018 - 12:03:34 CET