Re: Economics and the GPL

Greg Alexander <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Now, to my point:
> 
> Your use of the word coerce, while technically correct, is a cultural
> misuse unless you have the intention of misleading your readers into
> believing that the GPL has any stronger enforcement provisions than a
> typical contract.

A quote from http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/pragmatic.html

  What we can do is offer them an inducement to join. The GNU GPL is designed to make 
  an inducement from our existing software: ``If you will make your software free,
you
  can use this code.'' Of course, it won't win 'em all, but it wins some of the time.

As this is preceeded by:
  ... he has only two choices: release the new code as free software, or not at all. 

It's not like the "inducement" can be ignored without retribution.  And the
"stronger enforcement" is a little off-base - the GPL makes a *much* broader
claim than a typical (software) contract as most do not try to make a derivative
claim by mere linkage or usage.  I don't think anyone will argue that for *most*
cases, GPL is not coercive, *but* its derivative claim on binaries/source not related
to
it can't be anything but coercive.  

-r