From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,9a5f3bd162009c01 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: GNAT GPL 2005: Too clever by half? References: <70e0e$4331acfc$4995583$14979@ALLTEL.NET> <87hdcew7wq.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <1127511077.919641.107390@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> From: Brian May Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 16:30:40 +1000 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:1yNI1Vi66423ThvgoAV0wWxt434= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Host: snoopy.microcomaustralia.com.au X-Trace: news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com 1127543457 202.173.153.89 (24 Sep 2005 16:30:57 +1000) X-Complaints-To: abuse@pipenetworks.com X-Abuse-Info: Please forward all headers to enable your complaint to be properly processed. Path: g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsread.com!news-xfer.newsread.com!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeeds.ihug.co.nz!ihug.co.nz!news.xtra.co.nz!news-south.connect.com.au!duster.adelaide.on.net!news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com!not-for-mail Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5086 Date: 2005-09-24T16:30:40+10:00 List-Id: >>>>> "Chad" == Chad R Meiners writes: Chad> I've watched Stallman speak. He is either a liar or Chad> delusional about the nature of the GPL. I use to be a Chad> strong supporter of the GPL, but when I heard Stallman Chad> speak, I thought, "This man is nuts!". He wants us to give Chad> up the right to decide how we are to be compensated for our Chad> labor with respect to software. Just because you dislike Stallman isn't really a good reason to dislike the GPL IMHO. I believe as the copyright owner you have the right to decide how your software will be used. Hence I don't think the GPL is any more "viral" then other licenses that exist, e.g. "not available for commercial use". In fact, the GPL is considerably more flexible then such a license. Chad> P.S. In general, I support free software; however, I Chad> disagree with trying to force people to release free Chad> software. This in my opinion is not "free software". If we Chad> the users are not allow the copyright rights over works that Chad> we created by using the so called "free software" to write Chad> and compile, the users aren't really free are they? I think it is inappropriate having a run-time library required by a compiler impose license restrictions on the code you compile. The code I write is *my* code, not Adacore's code, and I think the decision on how I should license should be up to me. It should also be entirely up to me what other libraries I link with - using openssl should be acceptable. Having said that, I would be considerably happier if the restriction was "software must adhere with the DFSG" as opposed to "software must be GPL or GPL compatible". -- Brian May