On 26.10.2011 17:16, Jeff Nowakowski wrote:
On 10/26/2011 12:51 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Jeff Nowakowski"<j...@dilacero.org> wrote in message
Nitpicking? Are you serious? GPL has provided immense benefits and
has been voluntarily adopted around the world,
So have the non-viral free licenses.
And if I said they were "Free as in dogshit", would this also be "true"
and not mudslinging?
There is a serious point behind it, though.
The use of "free" in conjunction with the GPL, has a different meaning
than "free" normally means.
The term "free software" is highly misleading, it should probably be
spelt "Free Software(tm)". Or "Free* Software. *Conditions apply."
Public domain is "free as in free".
GPL is NOT "free as in free". And they talk about the "libre" sense of
free, but it ISN'T free in the libre sense, either! It's "free as in
copyleft".
I wish they would stop using the word "free". I think it's dishonest
marketing spin. Just use "copyleft".
Disclaimer: I have released some code under the GPL.
