Re: GNU "Moral Codes"

[mike3]

On Aug 20, 8:32 am, byron@upstairs.(none) (Byron Jeff) wrote:
> In article <1187586851.326530.240...@q4g2000prc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> mike3  <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Hi.
>
> >It seems the GNU licenses are designed so you can't just monopolize
> >off someone else's work -- rip it off and pilfer it for your profit,
>
> Profit has nothing to do with it. You can sell GPL software for profit.
> You can even sell someone else's GPL software for profit.
>
> >which is what incorporating it into a proprietary package without
> >making that free would do.
>
> Free="no money" or Free="source available downline"? GPL has no bearing
> on the first, and only a bearing on the second if you get someone else's
> software under the GPL.
>
> >This may be good, but what is the GNU
> >position on monopolizing or reaping a profit off licensing your OWN
> >work?
>
> It's YOUR work. Why would the GPL have a position on that? GNU as an
> organization wants all software to be freely available (free="source
> available"). But they can't impose that want on you as a developer of
> your own code.
>
> It seems like you come here and keep asking the same question over and
> over. What exactly are you trying to figure out? If it's your code, you
> can do what you want with it. GNU may want all code to be freely source
> available, but they can't impose that upon anyone. The GPL specifically
> defines the rights and responsibilities of a person who is distributing
> a codebase that has GPL licensed code that they did not write. That's
> all. No profit involved nor nothing about original code.
>
> BAJ

I was discussing here if the FSF or similar try to go after anyone
who uses a "proprietary" distribution model to further their own
agendas.