Re: "proprietary", was Re: ada on linux

[tmoran@bix.com]

>Those people would of course prefer a BSD like license to
>the GPL license, because then they can use the software in
>their proprietary products.

  If the software is GPLed, it can be used in "Those people"'s proprietary
product simply by agreement of the copyright holder, since he can release
his software under different licenses to different people.  So the only
difference is that with BSD "Those people" do not need permission of the
copyright holder.  While legal, adding significant value to one's
proprietary product by copying/including something BSDed, without its
author's permission, is usually considered unethical.  So saying that all
people who object to the GPL would prefer the BSD like license because
then they would be able to use the software, without it's author's
permission, in their proprietary products, is saying that all people who
object to the GPL do so because they wish to engage in that kind of
unethical behavior.  That is false.  There are many people who are not in
fact interested in stealing other people's software, but still believe the
GPL and its associated rhetoric very often have very negative consequences
for both developers and users.