RonB wrote: > Rjack wrote: > >> "So over the weekend I began to think about the GPL and my general >> disdain for it. For a license that is touted as 'free', it certainly >> doesn't feel that way. As a libertarian, I've often found myself baffled >> by the leftist stance that freedom has to be enforced with overwhelming >> regulation, and to me, the GPL is one of the best examples of such >> repression. Its viral nature is neither business nor government >> friendly, and its proliferation places a great strain on a developer's >> ability to quickly and freely incorporate quality software into highly >> complex and disparate systems. . . " >> >> http://www.tbradford.org/2008/09/kinder-gentler-free-software-license.html > > They incorporate and share -- why should that be a "viral nature." So what > is it the writer is advocating? Legal theft? >
I'm not sure that we need another license for free software. How many do we have now? 36? Here's a link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_free_software_licences There's a case to be made for examining the ones we have now but do we need another one? What is it designed to replace exactly? -- If it looks like a Duck, walks like a Duck and quacks like a Duck, it's a Duck. Otherwise its a Hardon Quack! _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
