Re: licensing issues
[email protected] ("Bradley M. Kuhn") Tue, 9 Jan 2001 23:46:36 -0500
| Newsgroups | perl.perl6.licenses |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
--SLAil/ztx45+OLrp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline John van V <[email protected]> wrote: > I was really amused to see RMS and Eric Raymond agree for the first time > in history where Chinese Linux companies were pirating the OS. I actually doubt RMS agreed that they were "pirating". I am sure he would have used the word "copyright infringement". Pirates tend to rape, murder and steal physical goods from people. Copyright infringement is not as bad as any of those things. But, since free software licenses use copyright, copyright infringement can happen, if the free software licenses aren't followed. > The problem isn't with the artistic license; it is with the GNU license. > So let's fix the GPL. It's actually a bit late to propose new RFC's to Larry about licensing. However, I might as well ask, what is it that you see is "broken" about the GPL? The Artistic license needs changes because of the various incongruencies and inconsistencies found by people in both the open source and free software communities, and documented in RFCs. Have you found such inconsistencies in the GPL? And, if so, how do they effect the dual license of Perl? Also, note that if we use a modified version of the GPL, it will likely be incompatible with the real GPL, which will cause big licensing problems. So, we should likely avoid modifying the GPL itself at all costs (but dual-licensing is of course a great idea). > Like, who do we know in Boston who is tough as nails (and doesn't pay for > her own drinks)? I have no idea what this means. > My whole point is to try to prevent a schism of the free s/w community to > make sure the world gets the best benefit from perl6. I don't see how such a schism would come about. Dual licensing is designed, in part, to prevent schisms by allowing each part of the community to get what it wants. The question was: "Did the old Artistic license do what we wanted?" I argued "no" in my RFCs. Some folks argued "yes". We'll see what Larry decides. -- Bradley M. Kuhn - http://www.ebb.org/bkuhn --SLAil/ztx45+OLrp Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE6W+ks53XjJNtBs4cRAmeMAKCA0DcsOt4H/bkR5NDKQ0hbMAtliQCgsu9/ 3nBrt9rmhiaFVourMaZFVEg= =p6zM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --SLAil/ztx45+OLrp--