[nycbug-talk] Re: wasabi

[alex at pilosoft.com]

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Marc Spitzer wrote:

> > > the GPL on your next subway ride and then tell me why I'm wrong.)
> > This is becoming a flamewar.
> 
> Reading the licence we are discussing is grounds for this atempt at
> taking this whole thead off topic by accusing Ike of starting a flame
> war?  I think you *have* read the gpl but just dont want other people to
> do so.  Why is that?  Personally I think it is more of a comunist
> license, ie touch it and you loose most/all of your property rights on
> what you wrote that touched it.  Face it the license has cooties.
Yes, GPL is infectious. You want to build your software on my free
software? your software will have to be free too. You don't like it? well,
then bugger off and don't touch my software.

Note the touches = "build on" not merely "use". 

Note that this is not that much different from a proprietary license that
doesn't give you royalty-free redistribution rights. You license a library
(say, report writing). Now, for each 'derived product' (as in, complete
package with the report writer compiled in) you are obligated to pay
royalty. And even if you have royalty-free distribution rights, they
usually come with strings attached. So, all restrictive licenses are
infectuous by design. 

GPL restricts you (as user of my software) from restricting freedom of
*others* to enjoy fruit of our combined labor (mine as original developer
and your as contributor). Again, in my eyes (as a person who writes
software), its a good thing. For someone who is a user of my software, who 
wants to profit from my work, its not a good thing. 

BSD is not infectious - because it is really limitation of liability plus 
release into public domain, not really a license.