> Michał Masłowski comment was also interesting. For me, BSD is actually > the most "free license" because it gives you the freedom to do as you > wish. Can it be used for enslaving of other people? Yes, but in the > moment it's in your hands you actually have more freedom than with > GPL.
Unless making a nonfree program, practically the only additional permission is to make derived works including code under some GPL-incompatible licenses like the four clause BSD license. It is useful in some specific projects, like BSD kernels (with much GPL-incompatible code). Copyleft leads to having more free software when other developers use copyleft code instead of reimplementing it to make their works nonfree. This is why its supporters don't consider permissively licensed software more free. I think the support for state regulation in RMS's political notes can be similarly explained with this meaning of freedom. > If we lived in community, instead of society, I would probably > accept ONLY the GPL license. But given the fact that we live in > society, I think BSD is a more "realistic" approach. What is the difference between a community and a society? > I think my "like" for BSD licenses, come from the fact that I > understand the need for a license different from GPL when it comes to > "free hardware" or "open source hardware", something that we > desperately need, but can only be achieved with a license that allows > for commercial use (without hiding any information of course). GPL allows commercial use (like all free software licenses), there are many businesses using, distributing and developing GPLed software commercially. (No need to count the ones preventing users from changing such software on their own devices here.) Are there widely used GPL-incompatible licenses for hardware designs, or is there a different reason for a different license for them? Or are there patent issues? (There are less opportunities for users to reprogram their hardware with modified designs than software; nearly all FPGAs need nonfree tools.) > In the end, I think I look at RMS the same way FSF looks at Debian. He > does a lot of good, and thank God he exists, but he is not perfect and > I would rather take his thoughts and work on top of them before > presenting them to other people, rather than just "provide a link" to > RMS homepage. And maybe it's for the better =) I agree with his explanations of some issues and not others (like free culture, works of opinion licensing or the existence of non-capitalist stateless societies).
pgp5jxeFBgtKS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
