Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 17:40:54 -0600 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: chat@FreeBSD.ORG, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: GPL kills KDE distribution Message-ID: <4.1.19981008173746.0429fc30@mail.lariat.org> In-Reply-To: <199810082246.PAA17690@kithrup.com> References: <199810082114.OAA00692.kithrup.freebsd.chat@dingo.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Well, I can't help thinking that if the KDE people had used a Berkeley-esque license, they'd be fine. Maybe we should recommend this. Incidentally, the GPL has a chilling effect on the development of drivers for hardware for the same reason it runs into problems with KDE. Suppose a hardware vendor is willing to supply a driver in object code form, but doesn't want to open the source because it reveals hardware trade secrets or gives it an "edge" over other companies using similar chips. The Berkeley license doesn't preclude linking in someone's closed source driver; the GPL does. We have an edge here that perhaps we should be exploiting. --Brett At 03:46 PM 10/8/98 -0700, Sean Eric Fagan wrote: >In article <199810082114.OAA00692.kithrup.freebsd.chat@dingo.cdrom.com> you >write: >>Chalk one up to the GPL really screwing things up. 8( > >No, chalk it up to people using non-free licensing terms (e.g., Qt's license) >and other people insisting that onl non-GPL licenses are truly free. > >You get what you deserve: you want software to be able to be non-free, you >end up with software that is non-free. > > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.1.19981008173746.0429fc30>