..on or around Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 12:00:38PM +0100, Jan Ciger said: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Greg Ewing wrote: > > Jan Ciger wrote: > > > >> You are wrong here. GPL gets triggered *only* by the act of > >> distribution, not by use. > > > > But distribution is a kind of use. So it does put some > > restrictions on some uses. > > Sorry, no. Distribution is *not* use. Distribution is fairly clearly > defined in both the license and the copyright law. > > > I don't see anything in the basic freedoms defined there > > that needs a *viral* licence in order to preserve it. > > I have explained that in my other mail to you. > > > So as far as I can see, the only reason to use the GPL > > rather than a more liberal licence is if you want > > to encourage *future* software to be free, not just > > what you're releasing at the time. > > You use GPL if you want to make sure that *your* software (and its > derivative works) remains free. However, there is no controversy here.
Jan is correct here. there is nothing intrinsically 'viral' about the GPL - a term used to imply that GPL licensed code aggressively infects any code-base it comes into contact with - converting it indefinitely. the GPL is as restrictive as it needs to be to protect freedoms downstream. its great success is a tribute to the fact it is trusted - and that it works - not that it is innately idealogically aggressive. if the license is seen to be too limiting then simply don't use it with your own code. similarly, don't base your own work on GPL licensed code. cheers, -- julian oliver http://julianoliver.com http://selectparks.net messages containing HTML will not be read. _______________________________________________ Soya-user mailing list Soya-user@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/soya-user
