Re: GNU License, Again

[David Kastrup]

mike3 <mike4ty4@yahoo.com> writes:

> So the _goal_ is to ultimately get all software free, since said
> freedom is considered a vital right under the GNU philosophy (if not
> _the_ core right of the GNU philosophy).

Actually, "all software" would be unnecessary: the universe of
proprietary software is full of reinventions of the wheel because
people can't just reuse software.

For example, there are dozens of proprietary compilers around, but
there is not much of an alternative to GCC among the free compilers.
While it would be interesting to study the other compilers, the actual
development is usually ok consolidating on a single product.

Also, the GPL does not demand that you redistribute derivative
software.  You can keep it private if you like.  What the GPL is
concerned with is just software that actually makes it into
circulation.

> Hence the reason for requiring that any distribution of derivatives
> to have their full source code released under the GPL _in toto_, not
> just the GPL pars -- so that new code then enters the pool of free
> software and therefore contributes to the freedom of all users.
>
> I always thought this was what it was, it's just that this guy kept
> on going about how it only keeps GPL stuff free, essentially in
> denial of the fact it also helps catalyze the growth of the free
> software pool, which is more than just "keeping GPL stuff free" as
> it entails that additional free code is released.

Well, you have seen Alfred interpret the passages from Richard I
cited, so you should have a pretty good idea how to interpret his
words.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum