Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com
Thu Jul 24 12:52:31 UTC 2008
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
>>>> But you must give up your freedom and rights or you are unable to
>>>> participate in distributing these things as part of a work that
>>>> contains any GPL-covered material.
>>> The "or" denounces your syllogism. The "must" is inappropriate when
>>> there's an alternative.
>> The alternative is not sharing any GPL-encumbered code at all. Do you
>> consider that a reasonable alternative?
>
> People have been sharing and modifying software licensed with the GNU GPL
> for ages, isn't that alternative somewhat imaginary?
No, very few people I know other than myself even know GPL software
exists. And the restrictions are largely responsible for keeping it
that way for those ages.
> You seem to consider "sharing" proprietary software is sharing. I think
> that's wrong since to me it is not sharing but, instead, gaining control.
No, I think proprietary software is reasonable, but BSD, MIT, MPL, CDDL,
Apache, and similar less restricted licenses are about sharing. GPL
is about taking away other people's choices.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list