Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:31:18 -0700 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen), "Mike Meyer" <mwm-dated-1009499377.cf4de8@mired.org> Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Wow. SuperFUD. (Was: GPL nonsense: time to stop) Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20011223142248.00c675f0@localhost> In-Reply-To: <eyvgeytfe6.gey@localhost.localdomain> References: <15397.9585.514476.882122@guru.mired.org> <local.mail.freebsd-chat/Pine.LNX.4.43.0112181134500.21473-100000@pilchuck.reedmedia.net> <local.mail.freebsd-chat/20011218110645.A2061@tisys.org> <200112182010.fBIKA9739621@prism.flugsvamp.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20011218180720.00d6e520@localhost> <20011219091631.Q377@prism.flugsvamp.com> <0en10ey5jo.10e@localhost.localdomain> <20011219215548.D76354@prism.flugsvamp.com> <lpellpwlhe.llp@localhost.localdomain> <15394.43349.782935.475024@guru.mired.org> <fxlmfxukw9.mfx@localhost.localdomain> <15394.56866.830152.580700@guru.mired.org> <18d718uuw2.718@localhost.localdomain> <15395.43708.816636.295489@guru.mired.org> <mi4rmivlud.rmi@localhost.localdomain> <15397.9585.514476.882122@guru.mired.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Yikes! As the many confusing examples below show, one of the main ways that the GPL hinders the development of any software that is not GPLed is to create massive FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) about licensing issues. This (besides some of the points that have already been mentioned) is yet another reason to stay as far away from the GPL as possible. The long discussion we've had over the past week (and the many others prior to this one) demonstrate that the ONLY way to ensure that the BSDs are truly free of all encumbrances -- including the aforementioned FUD -- is to license them and all of their parts only under truly free licenses that do not permit the assimilation of the code by the GPL. Only then will we (a) have a reasonable assurance of where we stand and what people's legal rights are with respect to the code; and (b) avoid being co-opted into the GPL "collective" due to the presence of GPLed code in the source tree or distribution. There are simply too many dangers involved in letting the GPL's nose into the tent, and as conservative engineers we simply cannot afford to let it in at all. Rather than wasting our energy trying to figure out what the GPL's effects might or might not be, or arguing about them, let's spend it on coding the GPL out of the BSD source trees and out of the distribution. Completely. --Brett At 03:11 AM 12/23/2001, Gary W. Swearingen wrote: >S, K, T = software parts; SK, ST = collective works. >s=source, b=binary >w==work, c==copy >A, B, C, D, and P(public) = persons > >-- Initially we have -- > >SswD = a source work which D owns (ie, on which D owns copyrights) and > has publicly licensed under the BSDL (and published copies). >SscP = a source copy which a member of the public owns. (Eg, B & C) > >KswB = a source work which B owns and > wishes to secret-code-license (SCL). >KscB = a source copy which B owns. > >TswC = a source work which C keeps under GPL, > so it doesn't matter for this whether he owns it. >TscC = a source copy which C keeps under GPL. > >-- Then we have (after some compilation/derivation) -- > >SKswDB = a source work which B created but B and D own. > (derived from SswD and KswB) >SKbcA = a binary copy which B licenses (or sells) to A. > >STwsDC = a source work which C created but C and D own. > (derived from SswD and TswC) >STsbcP = a source and binary copy which C wishes to license > to members of the public for no cash (but possibly some > cross-licensing in derivatives) under the GPL. 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?4.3.2.7.2.20011223142248.00c675f0>