[sword-devel] Fwd: GPL and other license related questions
chrislit at crosswire.org
Sat Jan 26 17:10:56 MST 2008
[Forwarding message per request. Sorry, I can't advise how to fix the
sending problem. --Chris]
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Moses McKnight <moses at mcknightinstruments.com>
> Date: January 26, 2008 3:59:22 PM PST
> To: chrislit at crosswire.org
> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] GPL and other license related questions
> Hey Chris, I tried to send this to the list but it bounced with the
> following error:
> Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; host mail.crosswire.org[18.104.22.168]
> 550-Verification failed for <moses at skytex.net> 550-Unrouteable
> address 550
> Sender verify failed (in reply to RCPT TO command)
> Can you send it for me? Or tell me what I need to do to send it?
> Jason Galyon wrote:
>> Chris Little wrote:
>>> The only people who would consider the GPL "freedom destroying"
>>> are people who only care about their own freedoms and not those
>>> of others (i.e. selfish people). I don't think we care about
>>> their interests. We certainly don't have any interest in having
>>> our work exploited by the selfish, who would like to exploit our
>>> years of work for their own personal, possibly monetary, gain.
>> This is full of angst and ignorance. I would expect that of a
>> child but not a Christian. If you can not develop a frontend (for
>> example) in whatever OSI approved license you choose then I believe
>> that is one of the many reasons why people see the GPL as viral and
>> freedom destroying.
> I personally don't see the angst in Chris' post. As for his
> argument I
> don't want to put words in his mouth but let me expand on it a little.
> The reason he can rightfully say that the people who would consider
> GPL "freedom destroying" are selfish and care only about their own
> freedoms is this: They think they should have the right (freedom) to
> someone else's software (time and labor) without recompense or
> restriction, but the people who wrote the software should not have the
> right or freedom to receive a recompense or place a restriction on
> work. This is the essence of slavery - someone else getting to use
> time and labor any way want without recompense.
> Furthermore, to call the GPL viral is a misnomer at best and really
> indicative of the selfish attitude mentioned above. If you don't like
> the license, don't use the software licensed that way. Quite simple.
> Nothing "forces" you to use the software. Your software is completely
> unaffected by the GPL if you don't use GPL software in it, and the GPL
> cannot possibly "infect" your software. You must purposely use GPL
> software in your software in order to affected by it, therefore the
> cannot be accurately called a "virus". To do so is what I would
> of a child and not a Christian :-) I would also say that the only
> people I have seen that call the GPL a virus and freedom destroying
> either companies or individuals who want to use GPL software in their
> own commercial software and don't like the license.
>> Some look for the good of all and see GPL as not the best method to
>> reach those ends.
> You may not intend to but the way this is worded gives the subtle
> implication that those who use the GPL are not looking for the good
> of all.
>> Again, there are other licenses out there and if you are forced to
>> only use GPL then read that again and notice the word "FORCE".
>> Lets try and be civil and take the rhetoric out.
> As I mentioned above, no one is "forcing" anyone to use the GPL. If
> don't like it, don't use the software. No one is "forcing" you to use
> the software either. That's some of the rhetoric you mention...
More information about the sword-devel