[nycbug-talk] lame...real lame Andy

Aron Roberts aron
Wed Jan 12 14:17:56 EST 2005

Correct me if I am wrong, but unless you modify the library you should 
be able to link against whatever you want with no repercussions from 
the GPL. Even then you would only be required to share your changes to 
that library.

I sure like the BSD license better however I am not sure that you are 
right in this case.

On Jan 12, 2005, at 2:13 PM, Marc Spitzer wrote:

> On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 09:47:37 -0500 (EST), Dru <dlavigne6 at sympatico.ca> 
> wrote:
>> Bruce then goes on to explain the intent and ramifications of the BSD 
>> and
>> GPL licenses. The intent of the GPL is to prevent open source code 
>> from
>> becoming commercialized (www.gnu.org/philosophy/shouldbefree.html). 
>> This
>> is the part that confused me, seeing all of the big software 
>> interests are
>> embracing GPL code left write and center. Whereas, the BSD license 
>> doesn't
>> place restrictions on what happens to the code i.e. it can stay open
>> source or end up in a commercial entity.
> The gpl, IMO, is anti innovation as far as software goes.  Explain
> this to the VC/shareholders:
> 1: you used a gpled library in your commercial app.
> 2: one of your customers figures it out
> 3: said customer demands all your code, using a lawyer
> 4: puts it up on sourceforge, along with his own compiled windows 
> binaries
> 5: it is your only product and sales have droped off by +90%
>> Bruce then explains how history is repeating itself: "The GPL is well
>> suited for use as a commercial marketing weapon, particularly by 
>> hardware or
>> service companies which, similar to IBM in the late 1950s and 1960s, 
>> profit if
>> the cost of software is driven to zero...zero-cost software can be 
>> used to
>> undermine the software of a competitor and can contribute to 
>> monopolistic
>> behaviour. It can drive software companies out of business. It is 
>> unclear if
>> the current generation of open source software will have this effect 
>> or not".
> the gpl is designed to destroy the value of software and it does a
> very good job of doing it.
>> If this is the case, it is certainly ironic that Stallman's vision of 
>> the
>> ideal license is being used to promote the commercial entities he is 
>> so
>> strongly opposed to.
> If you look at RMS's ideal world he was a comunist, you own nothing.
> marc
> _______________________________________________
> % NYC*BUG talk mailing list
> http://lists.nycbug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
> %Be sure to check out our Jobs and NYCBUG-announce lists
> %We meet the first Wednesday of the month

More information about the talk mailing list