Re: Problem with GNAT modified GPL and SourceForge

[Preben Randhol <randhol+abuse@pvv.org>]

On Fri, 8 Feb 2002 09:53:18 -0500, Marin David Condic wrote:
> Ahhhh. O.K. Gotcha now.
> 
> So under that heading does Sourceforge mean that the software is Proprietary
> or the license is Proprietary? I'd have to believe the former. But then
> what's the point? If you put source code up on a web site and make it
> available for download and then say: "But you can't use this without payment
> or some other special relationship with the owner...", then it seems kind of
> silly to have it on the website at all.
> 
> Of course calling a software license "Proprietary" is really kind of an
> arbitrary thing. Licenses exist on a kind of sliding scale with "Public
> Domain" (unlimited rights) on one end and "Locked up in a vault" (no rights
> at all) on the other. GPL is probably off to the left side and a Microsoft
> license is off to the right side, but both claim some property rights to the
> software and some limited license to use those rights by the end user.

No it means that the category is Other / Proprietary License as oppsied
to OSI approved license. Propriatary License means a license for Closed
Source programs (if you can call it like that) like Microsoft or Sun or
whoever.

Yes the GPL is Proprietarian in the sense that it requires the code and
derivative code to be in the "public domain". Wheras Microsofts license
is Proprietarian in the sense to keep the code out of the "public domain".
At least this is how I see it. 

-- 
Preben Randhol         �For me, Ada95 puts back the joy in programming.�