On Nov 17, 2007 9:54 PM, Tuomo Valkonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2007-11-17 21:38 +0530, Siju George wrote: > > Come on Tuomo. > > Don't get so upset of not being paid back for your efforts in some way > > or the other. > > I don't expect to get paid back, but I'd rather people not fuck with > me after all my efforts, as the distros do. > > > Let me ask you this. > > How many free software have you used your self? > > For how many have you paid back? > > At least with a "thank you" towards the authors? > > Not much worth thanking for there. Most of the good stuff is clones > that I could have pirated anyway. >
I just don't get your point here Tuomo. You don't consider the least thing you can do ( i.e to thank the authors ) a worth while effort because you have the option to pirate ( is it an option? isn't it illegal? are illegal stuff decent options? ) . But you get upset at people who work on your software so that is is made available to the masses more easily, because they are unable to continue their good work, because of the new license restrictions you yourself brought in. So just help them out. Change you licence back to some really free one like the BSDL. You yourself said ============================================================== >In fact, the name use >terms in my license are basically all that I care about; the LGPL >is just baggage. ============================================================== this will most likely solve the problem. Being a programmer yourself you should be more aware of the chaos all the different flavors of licenses create while sharing code. I politely urge not to add your own terms and create your own licenses if you would like to share your code in FOSS. >It just happens that FOSS crap > has become dominant among many of those programs. And for browser > I use Opera. (Even warez groups, BTW, often tend to distribute their > cracks alongside the pirated copy, instead of distributing modified > binaries only. Yeah, and version is apparent from the file name > listed by sites.) > > > If some thing in your license is just baggage then just remove it. > > I thought about that, but it was just simpler to extend the LGPL. > Please re-think your decision. I am sure your software has been beneficial to a lot of people and so let it continue to be beneficial. In the long run I am sure you will see random addition of clauses to FOSS licenses will not help either you or people who maintain your software or the users of your software. Hope you will make a helping move that is beneficial to all :-) Kind Regards Siju
