From: Chad Perrin <perrin@...>
Date: 2007-10-16T01:22:47+09:00
Subject: Re: MIT vs. Ruby/GPL License

On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 08:33:58PM +0900, Randy Kramer wrote:
> On Sunday 14 October 2007 11:29 pm, Jon Lambert wrote:
> > Jeremy Henty wrote:
> > > On 2007-10-15, Jon Lambert  wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Which one gives the user more freedom, the unconditional or
> > >> conditional grant?
> > >
> > > The GPL gives the *user* *complete* freedom. It restricts *other*
> > > activities, such as distributing a derived work, but it imposes no
> > > restrictions on simply using the software.
> > 
> > Using that limited definition of user, one who "simply uses the software", 
> > most proprietary licenses also give the user complete freedom.   
> 
> Hmm, most proprietary licenses (I can't immediately think of any exceptions) 
> do not give the *user* (who might be a programmer, or not) the freedoms to:
> 
>    * review (and learn) from the source code
>    * modify the program (using the source code) for his own purposes and use
>    * pay someone other than the original "manufacturer" to modify the program 
> for his own purposes and use

I'd classify the first two (because they specify access to source code as
a condition, rather than referring to any legal privilege) as
"capability" or "opportunity" rather than "freedom".  I'm a stickler for
terms that way.

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Kent Beck: "I always knew that one day Smalltalk would replace Java.  I
just didn't know it would be called Ruby."