Sometime Today, Manish Jethani assembled some asciibets to say:
> misunderstood) so far, Richard Stallman differentiates between public
> domain software (PDS) and free software (FS).
>
> PDS, on the other hand, allows for free modification and re-use,
> without any restrictions (no liscence). Now isn't that complete
> freedom? Shouldn't all s/w be PDS in that case (instead of FS)?
Unfortunately, you cannot enforce a licence except through the licence
itself - which is what the GPL does and the PDS does not.
Furthermore, allowing someone to take your code and proprietise it is not
a good idea. He could then technically prohibit you from using your own
code because he now has a shrink wrapped licence on it (see UCITA).
In the end, it's your choice. If you use GPL'ed code in your software,
then that part of the code must remain GPL'ed (not the entire software).
What you do with your contribution is your own business.
Philip
--
Those lovable Brits department:
They also have trouble pronouncing `vitamin'.
To subscribe / unsubscribe goto the site www.ilug-bom.org ., click on the mailing list
button and fill the appropriate information
and submit. For any other queries contact the ML maintener
