From: David Douthitt <DDouthitt@...>
Date: 2003-07-10T23:05:37+09:00
Subject: Re: OT: GPL - was Re: My brief and torrid affair with Ruby.

If you want the least restrictive "license" available, then your work
should be placed into the public domain.  Somehow, that doesn't seem to
be very popular....

David Douthitt
CUNA & Affiliates
UNIX Systems Administrator
LPI Level 1, Linux+
ddouthitt@cuna.coop


>>> B.Candler@pobox.com 7/10/03 5:09AM >>>
On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 03:58:11PM +0900, Robert Feldt wrote:
> And I'm trying to understand in detail why you don't like the GPL.
It
> seems you don't like it because of its "philosophical baggage" and
> not because you want to allow commercial entities to use your code
> in their closed apps.

From my point of view, I don't like the GPL simply because it is more
restrictive that other licences. For free software, the fewer legal
burdens
which are placed on me (the user), or which I (the writer) place on my
users, the more comfortable I am.

If you're trying to make a living out of selling software, that's a
different matter. Dual-licencing seems to be the solution there: if you
want
to use my work for free, then your own derived work has to be tainted
with
the same conditions. If you don't want that - because you want to make
money
out of our combined work - then buy a licence. That way, we both
receive
compensation for the commercial application of our work.

Sleepycat's licence for BDB is a good example.

Regards,

Brian.