-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Le 22 Juin 2003 07:28, Ivica Bukvic a écrit :
> Many of you have pointed out that limiting GPL would hinder the freedom > it stands for. I agree. I never meant to change THE GPL, but rather to > create an offspring GPL-like license that had my suggested restrictions. So basically, you want to restrict the use of a software to a specific type of operating system? Like M$ does? > Dual licensing perhaps is the best option at this moment. I feel very > strongly about this since it protects all of our efforts and time > investments in Linux. This is against the idea of free software. I never heard of a free software license that restricts the use of a software to a specific type of operating system, computer of peripheral. Adding this restriction to the GPL and use double licensing would not make it better, it would make it non-free. Read the GPL. Here's an excerpt: "Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope." > I would also suggest to be careful of the "elitist" talk how Linux' > freedom offers less commonly used apps and hence the art of a Linux > user is somehow better than of the others. So GNU/Linux users are elitists because they can use command line tools? You sound like a typical elitist Mac user... ;-) - -- Marc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+9bsgQdzoeKQ0PccRApB6AKCDJMIKensIwiQ/E7/bCWx+xw5MCACfciTy klTGGalaRtOonGtMErRSc7w= =+Twm -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----