'GPL encumbrance problems' (jdow)

[Mike McCarty]

Erwin Rol wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 10:07 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> 
>>On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 08:20, Erwin Rol wrote:
>>

>>How does that relate to who controls which piece?  Why should it
>>not be left to the end user whether he is willing to obtain
>>the required licenses to the parts he wants?
> 
> 
> Because you make money by selling your software that depends on someone
> else his work, that's why. And the owners of the GPL library don't
> control anything but the use of their library. If you don't like that
> don't use their library for your software.

This is all any of us have said. I wonder why you got so
agitated when we said exactly what you just did.

[snip]

>>>And you _demand_
>>>that it comes for free and gratis! If you don't like the GPL license of
>>>the library, rewrite it, nothing stops you from doing that. 
>>
>>I'm not demanding anything.  I'm pointing out that the GPL tries
>>to assert control of components that belong to others and prevents
>>many useful combinations of things from being available at all.
> 
> 
> No others try to take control of GPL software, nobody forces those
> "others" to use the GPL software for their product.

Where is this mythical person trying to take control of
GPL software? What I see here is people who say they
avoid the use of it. In my dictionary "avoidance" and
"control" don't mean the same thing.

>>Ummm, no.  In many cases it is used  intentionally to prevent
>>other people's improved versions from competing against the
>>company's own commercial version (MySQL, ghostscript, etc.).
>>In other cases the effect may be accidental, but it is still
>>anti-competitive and prevents end users from having the choice
>>to pay for the improved versions.
> 
> 
> *shock* *horror* Commercial companies like MySQL dare to charge money

I wonder whether you
	(a) are a troller
	(b) are actually incapable of comprehending written English
	(c) cannot think clearly due to emotional upset/anger/whatever
	(d) have a personality disorder
	(e) something I don't know what it is, or
	(f) all of the above.

You have argued repeatedly against claims which weren't made
by anyone on this thread.

[snip stuff not responsive to the subject matter]

>>>Can someone please point me to the law that says "you are forced to use
>>>GPL software" since apparently some people feel they are forced to use
>>>this unfair GPL license.
>>
>>What's the point of it existing then if people shouldn't use it?
> 
> 
> The point is I (and I think a lot of others) use it, and I don't care if
> you do. You are free to not use it.

And that's all anyone here (whom you so violently oppose) has said.
We have all said "Because of the nature of [L]GPL source and how it
invades other people's works, we chose not to use it in our programs."

> It is plain copyright law, you are not allowed to copy my work
> (installing it on your machine is copying) without my permission. And I
> (and others) happen to only give that permission in the form of the GPL
> license. Whats so hard about this? 

Nothing. Nobody objected to it, either. We did say that as a consequence
we don't use [L]GPL source with our programs. Which is what you said we
should do. So why are you upset?

Mike
-- 
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!