From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 25 14:52:46 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 708F616A4CE for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 14:52:46 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ms-smtp-02-eri0.ohiordc.rr.com (ms-smtp-02-smtplb.ohiordc.rr.com [65.24.5.136]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8830343D45 for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 14:52:45 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from vkaul@ma.rr.com) Received: from gogobera.ma.rr.com (dhcp024-160-199-227.ma.rr.com [24.160.199.227])i9PEqfJl028958; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:52:41 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 09:52:01 -0500 To: TM4525@aol.com, questions@freebsd.org References: <1dd.2f054a5f.2eae5de2@aol.com> From: "Vijay Kaul" Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=iso-8859-15 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1dd.2f054a5f.2eae5de2@aol.com> User-Agent: Opera M2/7.54 (Win32, build 3869) X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine Subject: Liberal vs Conservative [Re: GPL vs BSD Licence] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 14:52:46 -0000 Forgive my etiquete, please. Since I'm certainly not answering any questions, I felt it appropriate to take this off of "questions." Is that good form, or have I put the proverbial foot in mouth? On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 09:47:14 -0400 (EDT), wrote: > In a message dated 10/25/04 4:21:53 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > amf@hobbit.neveragain.de writes: <-- big snip --> > The lack of foresight of the GPL is that, if Jupiter had no choice but > to > give away their work, then the work never would have been done, so even > people willing to pay for it wouldn't have it. > > The GPL vs BSD issue is like liberal vs conservative. I agree-ish. However, I would say that "conservative" implies (loosely) "remaining the same," which is to say, supporting institutions or traditions already in place. On the other hand, "liberal," in this case, would mean the opposite: unbound by tradition. (liberal also, of course, is anti-authoritarian) Both licences seem to be liberal, then, in that they break from traditional licencing. Look deeper, though, and you see that the BSD licence allows further development without restriction, while the GPL licence imposes its own tradition, as best it can, in perpetuity. > The liberal plaform > sounds > good and reasonable to those who don't understand the bigger picture. This was the comment to which I had to reply. I know the GPL/BSD argument has been had over and over again. Is GPL "free-er" or is BSD "free-er," etc. And, although I did bring it up, I'm sorry :P I must point out, though, that I always considered the BSD licence to be the most liberal available. Also, I find it insulting to think that by following a "liberal platform," I'm missing "the bigger picture." In fact, I feel that by following the *conservative* GPL licence, many are missing the "bigger picture:" if you attempt to exert any sort of authority over things (code, furniture, land, people) you will propigate the notion that authority over those things is an acceptable one. By truly relinquishing control over the things, you are allowing freedom, as an ideology and practice, to gain momentum--not to mention, being quite liberal. <-snip-> > > FreeBSD is a perfect example of a thriving project with BSD licensing. Is > FreeBSD > a "dead end"? Is the community worse off because companies like Cayote > Point > and > Emerging Technologies don't give the source to their products? No, > because > those > products never would have been created if they were hindered by the GPL. Absolutely. And maybe, after existing for decades and gaining more and more market share, and, therefore, economic value, these companies will decide that BSDing their code: is *not* financial suicide, will spur innovation, allows them to improve their product cheaply and quickly, improves securit, on & on, and so, they will. Instead of forcing the licence on these companies, as the GPL would've done, the BSD licence, and the success of BSD/Open Source projects, is simply showing the way. If that's not a liberal idea, what is? -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/