Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 17:35:25 -0800 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: joelh@gnu.ai.mit.edu Cc: dyson@freebsd.org, cmott@srv.net, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: GPL Message-ID: <7502.856316125@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 18 Feb 1997 18:48:33 EST." <199702182348.SAA09936@kropotkin.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> This is a feature, not a bug. It was designed that way intentionally, > to keep GNU's works from becoming tools for the proprietary software > people. But it's a bug if you'd like to help out the proprietary software people, you see. That's where RMS and I have classically differed (and we've argued about this a LOT :). I don't see the constraints on profit as being quite so wide as he (or the GPL) does. If someone wants to pay me to write a proprietary hack for FreeBSD (modifying BSD copyrighted code), for which their changes will never see the light of day and will, in fact, be sold for lots of money then that really doesn't bug me because I can use their money to feed the kids, keep the wolf away and indulge my hardware habit while I spend my free hours hacking FreeBSD, unworried by money matters or hungry children. I'm also benefiting from being able to make money at something I actually enjoy doing, rather than writing Visual C++ code all day for some Windows project and slowly edging towards suicide, and even if the average FreeBSD user never sees the actual code I wrote for GreedyCorp, Inc. they will probably see quite a few ancillary benefits from the ideas and expertise I gained in taking FreeBSD in new (albeit proprietary) directions for that company, to say nothing of my being a happier individual in general and likely to be around longer than if I top myself for having to write Visual Basic. I'm also likely to find and fix a lot of problems, working to someone else's far more stringent deadlines, and it'd be rare indeed to see GreedyCorp refuse to let the straight fixes out - they know it's in their best interest to avoid big reintegration headaches in the future, and if I was a smart boy I already raised and settled this issue before I even started the contract. The users can definitely win here, just as they've already been winning from the involvement of some of the commercial interests currently surrounding FreeBSD, and the developer can win. Why throw that away or make it needlessly complicated? Such arrangements are already difficult enough without having GreedyCorp running scared from your contract proposal because it mentions the dreaded GPL (and yes, there is considerable awareness of the GPL at various corporate levels). The real point is simply that there is still quite a bit of value in the "grey areas" which the GPL seems to strongly discourage. RMS would prefer a far more black-and-white reality in the commercial software world, and I can't fault him for setting and sticking to a very high set of ideals, but I just don't think that it makes sense to draw the lines that closely and seek to enforce by law what you should and can be enforcing by pre-agreement with your clients. I've been in this business full-time since 1978, and I actually have to say that programmers have far more influence with management than anyone gives them due credit for. The good managers know who's buttering their bread, and if it takes the occasional political battle over releasing some fairly non-strategic, not-exactly-the-company-crown-jewels code into the freely re-distributable domain to make some of their programmers happy, they'll do it. I've had considerable success prying loose various bits of code from companies, or getting them to relax their militant stance about some part of the freeware community (or its products), and in ALL cases it was accomplished through negotiation, not waving threatening pieces of paper around. That would have accomplished exactly zero in any of the cases I can think of. All things considered, I'd be really happy if the legal realities for liability and copyright made it possible for me to release all my code with a "legal notice" about this long: This is my code, you can use it for anything you like, just please don't be a cretin and try to pretend that you wrote it, or break it and then try to blame me. Thanks. That's really all I want to say. I don't *want* a threatening copyright since such a thing would only screw any of my potential negotiations with companies whom I would very much like to see use and improve the code. Negotiation on a case by case basis has worked more than well enough for me, better than I'd ever have a right to even expect, and a pit-bull copyright I need like a KKK banner at a Martin Luther King memorial rally. :-) > Not entirely orthogonal. The ability to make source-level > modifications to the code is often extremely useful. And if you look at every BSD system you might ever want to run, it comes with all of it - how about that! :-) The GPL may enforce the question of source, but it's hardly correct to say or even imply that it's the only way of going about it. I've heard a lot of flag waving in the Linux groups about how the GPL saves from predation and software tyranny, but frankly I've yet to see a single instance of that anywhere close to home myself in these last 19 years. To my view, it's a solution looking for a problem. Sure, I've heard about air crashes - they're on the news with distressing frequency. Does this mean that I fly everywhere with a parachute and insist on a seat next to the emergency exit? No. Statistically, I'm more likely to die of a hernia from lugging that damn parachute around. People get shot on the street frequently, should we all wear kevlar body armor at all times, regardless of the discomfort? No, that would be a hateful existence. Should we wrap all of our code around a multi-page legalese document that sets down more restrictions than your average insurance policy just in case someone *might* want to rip it off? No. That would be the GPL. :-) Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7502.856316125>