[nycbug-talk] gpl on /.

[Mikel King]

On Sep 30, 2005, at 4:31 PM, Marc Spitzer wrote:

> On 9/30/05, Hubert Feyrer <hubert at feyrer.de> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2005, Marc Spitzer wrote:
>>
>>>> GPL is all about this "freedom" thing, I doubt that can (or  
>>>> should!) be
>>>> changed.
>>>>
>>>
>>> GPL in not about freedom or free software, I have looked up free in
>>> several dictionaries and there has *NEVER* been a definition that
>>> fit(from previous thread, not here).  The FSF lie about the free and
>>> freedom part by coming up with there own private definition that  
>>> does
>>> not exist anywhere else.
>>>
>>
>> That's why I put the term in quotes, and probably always will when it
>> comes to the FSF/GPL's view on that term.
>>
>
> A bit to subtle for me, missed the significance of the "".
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>> My point was that now is a good time to start tracking any
>>> libs/products that you use for licence issues, and anything that  
>>> they
>>> use etc. until you run out of dependencies.  So you can figure out
>>> what you *CAN* safely deliver to a client.  The last thing you  
>>> want to
>>> see happen is even the credible threat of a lawsuit because of
>>> technology decisions you made.
>>>
>>> It may also be a good time to start education the people who  
>>> write the
>>> libs you use to deliver products that the gpl3 could be bade from  
>>> the
>>> POV of people using/not forking  there project.
>>>
>>
>> Yep!
>>
>> At last year's Chaos Communications Congress in Berlin, I  
>> basically read
>> the GPL to 200 people. It was on one side interesting to see how
>> interested they ware, and scary on the other side seeing that they  
>> still
>> didn't get the "you have to release your modified sources" even after
>> that.
>>
>
> People hear/read what they want to when reading a document.
>
> But at least that is a managed, should be well known by now, problem.
>
> But the idea that you must publish a link to download your entire site
> if you use a gpl3 lib needs to get out.
>
> marc



I really think this is one of Stallman's more stellar ideas. It  
definitely reflects his true genius . How could I not want my  
programmers to build a command into the app we've just paid millions  
to develop so that my competition and even end clients can download  
and examine at their leisure.

Seriously, he has single handily done more damage to the 'free'  
software initiative than any other entity including Microsoft or even  
SCO for that matter. Thank the digigods for the osl, apache and of  
course bsd licenses.

On a side note, I'm wondering what sort of security holes this will  
open?