[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-chat] µC/avr crypto lib

From: David Kelly
Subject: Re: [avr-chat] µC/avr crypto lib
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:46:14 -0500

On Jul 24, 2008, at 4:54 PM, Bob Blick wrote:

I think that is just one point of view. Part of the spirit of GPL is to further public development. That is why code I release to the public is
released under GPL. I want improvements to it done by others available
to the public.

The sprit of GPL is that Richard Stallman saw the Lisp environment he worked on claimed by a financial backer and turned into a successful commercial product and locked him out of all the source, even the parts he had written. The result was an extreme knee-jerk reaction to the left known as GPL.

The BSD license is more open and more free specifically because you may use the code for anything in any way other than to claim it as your original work. The BSD license does not allow for itself to be revoked. Once BSD-licensed code is out in the wild it can never be pulled back. That is exactly the problem Richard Stallman overreacted to in creating GPL.

There is nothing about the BSD license which hinders public development.

We already see Daniel Otte not only wants GPL to require users to contribute fixes and enhancements back, but that he wants to own those changes so that he can sell licenses outside of GPL. This is called, "Having your cake and eating it too." That means everyone else has to abide by GPL, but he is above it.

Haven't heard of any justification as to why Daniel's crypto library is better than the totally free pubic domain TomCrypt. Or the Lesser- GPL genuine FSF GNU libgcrypt: http://directory.fsf.org/project/libgcrypt/

The reason the BSD license works is that businesses and entrepreneurs can postpone their decision as to whether any changes they have made are a competitive advantage, or just a nuisance to maintain. And meanwhile protect their original work.

As for GPL, link it into proprietary code and immediately one loses one's rights to the proprietary code. Its not just the library that is GPL but the entire project. LGPL was created in recognition of this, and to emphasize that property of GPL. LGPL is not a copyright virus, but GPL is.

Apple lifted many BSD parts of FreeBSD for MacOS X. Apple has contributed huge amounts of code and work back into BSD. What I happened to see the most was in NFS support and bug fixes.

David Kelly N4HHE, address@hidden
Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]