Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

inode0 wrote:
On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
inode0 wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 11:39 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
You were told about the problems earlier on too and you choose to ignore
it. CDDL was deliberately designed to be incompatible with GPL
Deliberate? _Everything_ that is not the GPL is incompatible with the
GPL.
For a list of dozens of examples showing this statement to be utterly
wrong see

http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html#GPLCompatibleLicenses
The statement is not wrong - the reason a few that are listed as compatible
is that the permit themselves to be replaced by the GPL. When combined in a
work with GPL components any other attributes of the original licenses no
longer apply.

This is amazing logic. If a few *dozen* examples contradicting your
claim that everything that is not the GPL is incompatible with the GPL
doesn't convince you then nothing can.

Please explain how a work containing any GPL'd material can contain any that is not covered by the GPL, given the 'work as a whole' provision in the license. While there are indeed licenses that permit their own terms to be replaced by the GPL when used in this way, that means the terms _become_ the GPL, not that different terms are or can be, by design, compatible.

You seem to really have a beef with copyleft and that is fine.

I have a beef with representing restrictions as freedom.

Some
people value freedom for developers more than freedom for users.

Restrictions have nothing to do with freedom no matter how you spin it.

And
they tend to use licenses that grant as much freedom to developers as
they desire. Others prefer to assure freedom for users and they tend
to favor copyleft licenses like the GPL. It is an honest difference of
opinion but there really isn't anything furthered by misrepresenting
what the other side stands for.

So drop the misrepresentation and make the license enumerate all of the things it prohibits instead of hand-waving about freedom while in fact preventing most of the possible ways of re-using the code.

--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx


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

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Industry choice
    ... an openly stated goal is an indirect effect: ... LGPL and GPL. ... >licenses are cleared as ... >> programmers for programmers, ...
    (comp.lang.python)
  • Re: HAY Betov, still no support for GPL or LINUX, WHY ????
    ... > So, you criticize others for not using GPL licenses, and then you ... we release RosAsm under _both_ Licenses. ... This is the trait of the Marxists and of the French revolution. ... of freedom is something way over the head of the usual US ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?
    ... releasing the changes/what they modified back to the community. ... All the GPL required of them that they allegedly ... specific version of the GPL with code under other licenses, ... If you need help to determine whether some Free Software package ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: GPL compliance
    ... so don't treat me like I'm new to the GPL. ... a reading of some of the copyright law. ... to have licenses from of _ALL_ owners of IP on the CD, ... they're nasty licenses with magic statement clauses, ...
    (Ubuntu)
  • Re: GPL compliance
    ... GPL creates no such agent. ... The GPL is a typical license which licenses rights to copy, derive, ... My admission is my realization that some of the Red Hat IP is not ... re-publisher Daniel where clause 3 matters similarly for each. ...
    (Ubuntu)