Re: Java problem

Alan Cox wrote:
Its really very simple. The GPL requires you provide any contributions
under a licence that makes them free.
You mean restricted, don't you?

If you are at the point where you conclude that people type the reverse
of the word they mean you have serious problems.

I'm not the one who reversed the meaning of free to mean restricted. And the GPL is simply restrictions.

something better? Any why assume that it would necessarily be charged for? There are plenty of examples of non-GPL'd code that is freely available and no evidence that it can't stay that way.

There are also very large numbers of examples where key parts did so,
particularly with modular code such as an OS.

And the problem? The unrestricted form is still available and everyone has a choice of which to use. Freedom should be about increasing your choices not restricting them. And any code that exists on a network can affect all of us, so we are better off with common, well-tested components instead of forcing new breakage to be invented.

It is not illegal, but it takes code that permits future innovation and turns it into something that restricts it, harming everyone in the process.

And the GPL exists to stop someone taking code and turning it into
something that restricts further, that is the heart of what it does,
which makes your delusions even stranger.

It exists to keep potentially better variations from competing against the original, which makes sense in the cases where the author is selling his own better version or support for the specific problems it embeds.

It's no delusion that better things could exist if the GPL did not prohibit them, perhaps even things that would compete successfully with The Monopoly.

What? Competition is a good thing, and necessary for freedom and innovation. Preventing it is an act of restriction, not freedom.

A competing book is not the another authors book reprinted and the money
pocketed. An innovative painting is not a copy of an existing work.

Those aren't exactly analogous. It would be more like a book/painting available freely to everyone prohibiting it's inclusion in a compilation of works - or keeping themselves from being improved in other ways. The FSF even claims that it is illegal to distribute components separately that may be combined with GPL'd parts unless you apply the same restrictions. That's like saying I can't give someone a cover for their copyrighted book or a frame for their painting.

--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Wedging in creation theory
    ... You mean you want to attempt to foist your delusions into the science ... the act of creation by God is a free act, knowledge about freedom will ... lead to belief in creation by God. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Torture, Empire and the SOA
    ... You also believe that Bush is leading you to victory and freedom. ... <delusions of the collective cut> ...
    (soc.culture.iraq)