Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 03:53:11 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@online.fr> Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Use/Utilize Message-ID: <3CB41997.214F408C@mindspring.com> References: <3CB2125B.8F11C442@mindspring.com> <200204090020.g390KTPL059689@grimreaper.grondar.org> <3CB2733E.F98DD29B@mindspring.com> <20020409132012.F48437@lpt.ens.fr> <3CB3737A.1551931@mindspring.com> <20020410043451.GA1013@lpt.ens.fr> <3CB3DF33.5B677641@mindspring.com> <20020410073309.GA279@lpt.ens.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Rahul Siddharthan wrote: > > No, actually I was talking about the BSDL; it was other people > > who borught up that "Abuse of the BSD License" might include > > inclusion in GPL'ed programs. > > Sorry -- I read the above, with preceding quotes, several times and > just can't make out what you're talking about. Are you saying the > BSDL uses the phrase "free software"? I can't find the word "free" > anywhere in the BSDL. Are you saying people who mix the BSDL with GPL > software may get confused by the term "free software"? That's then > clearly their fault for not reading the GPL first. If neither of > these, just what are you talking about? No. I guess I need to referesh your memory, as to the start of this current set of threads: On 06 Apr 2002, Ian Pulsford <ianjp@optusnet.com.au> wrote: ] It is commonly spouted in Linux forums that you take BSD licensed code ] and do what you want with it including putting into your GPL project ] under a GPL license. On looking closer at the "simplified" license I ] don't see anywhere that it says you can freely relicense code under ] another license. ] (http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/freebsd-license.html) [ ... ] ] So where did the idea that you could use BSD licensed code without ] regard for (retaining) the license come from? Reference to original complete posting: <http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=854607+0+archive/2002/freebsd-chat/20020407.freebsd-chat>; The answer is that, if the claim is indeed "that you take BSD licensed code and do what you want with it including putting into your GPL project under a GPL license", then it is my thesis that the answer to the question is that there is intentional misuse of language within the community of the claimants, particularly RMS himself, which could erroneously lead to that conclusion. That is what I'm saying, and that has been what I have been saying. My original response reference is: <http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=869600+0+archive/2002/freebsd-chat/20020407.freebsd-chat>; And any thinly disguised defense of intentional misuse of the English language in order to obfuscate the matter is merely that -- an attempt to obfuscate the matter. It is very common, in my experience, for radical GPL advocates, in these situations, to turn these discussions into debates about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, thereby losing the main point -- and never speaking to it, only to side details, ad nauseum. It's very hard to not attribute this to intentional efforts at losing the main point. The fact of the matter is that the GPL is an instrumentality of the GNU Manifesto. If you don't understand the GNU Manifesto's intent and goals, the primary of which is the abolishment of intellectual property law, then you really have no place in a discussion about it (or, in fact, using the GPL on your code). If, on the other hand, you wish to offer an alternative hypothesis explaining Mr. Pulsford's putative observations, feel free. If I take issue with your hypothesis, I'll involve myself in the thread... as I did. You stated that the license was not required to be maintained on derivative works, only the Copyright notice: <http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=867057+0+archive/2002/freebsd-chat/20020407.freebsd-chat>; When I pointed out that the requirement for retaining the notice was inclusive: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=885718+0+/usr/local/www/db/text/2002/freebsd-chat/20020407.freebsd-chat>; and we debated the fine points for a bit, you recanted, as in the last paragraph of: <http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=932404+0+archive/2002/freebsd-chat/20020407.freebsd-chat>; The entire "use/utilize" debate is an attempt to discredit an example of the intentional misuse of language. Even were this attempt successful (and I do not believe that it has been), the only thing a success in the redefinition of the word "utilize" as a synonym for the word "use" would have is to indicate a poor choice of examples on my part, not that my premise was invalid (or even valid, to be fair). -- Terry 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?3CB41997.214F408C>