Re: [tlug] GPL Quote

[Curt Sampson <cjs@example.com>]

On 2008-12-25 17:07 +0900 (Thu), Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

> URL!  URL!  URL!  (I seem to have missed this one.)

  http://clisp.cvs.sourceforge.net/*checkout*/clisp/clisp/doc/Why-CLISP-is-under-GPL

>  >     Building libgmp.a was just too hard work. Other people shouldn't get
>  >     it for free.
> 
> ...But most people take a proprietary interest in their software, and
> use the GPL precisely because they want to retain (certain kinds of)
> control and receive payment (in kind) for their work.

Which is fair enough. I have no objection to the existence of the GPL,
and not even very much objection to its popularity, but I have strong
objections to selling it as providing "freedom." That sort of Orwellian
doublespeak damages the language and our ability to reason.

On 2008-12-25 09:49 +0100 (Thu), Christian Horn wrote:

> I agree and would prefer to put effort into GPL-projects over others
> for that cause:  if code gets greated others should not only get it
> but also be forced by license to make modifications public.

Well, you want something stronger than the GPL, then. The GPL only
forces you to make modifications public if you make the compiled version
public; you can modify all you like without distributing source if you
don't distribute the binary.

On 2008-12-25 18:26 +0900 (Thu), Kenneth Burling wrote:

> There are different definitions of freedom, and differing degrees of
> freedom.   Some of us see the "freedom" presented in the form of the
> GPL as the ultimate truth.  Others see it as the same sort of
> "Freedom" that black American's were given right after the abolition
> of slavery.  "You are free, now do what you are told."

I'd agree with neither the idea that the GPL provides "freedom" nor with
your characterization of abolition.

cjs
-- 
Curt Sampson       <cjs@example.com>        +81 90 7737 2974
           Functional programming in all senses of the word:
                   http://www.starling-software.com