[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: GPL Liscensing on New Release: What Gives?
"Tony Taylor" <T_Taylor@att.net> writes:
> Right, that is the aspiring entrepreneur's perspective. But GPL targets
> the
> entrepreneur's code via "infection" or "tainting". The GPL "spiel" reads
> like:
> individual freedom is jetisoned in favor of a special interest group. And
> the "spiel"
> is designed to prey on the naive by attempting to give a cartoon character
> personality to the source code ("freeing" the software which unfortunately
> means "enslaving" the developer-user).
Tony, the developper-user is always free not to distribute the GPLed
code at all.
> Again, my stand is that trying to infect or taint the businessman's code or
> the
> businessman's behavior (making him a distribution point for your source by
> force)
> is the unethical issue to be dealt with here and not the primary tenet of
> U.S. history.
Again, a priori, no businessman is required to distribute anything.
They have the choice not to distribute (under any form) GPLed
software. If they are so much in love with some piece of GPLed code
that they have to have it in their product, they can always
reimplement it.
Regards,
ldd
Follow-Ups:
References: