On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 8:20 PM, sarose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> GPL or GNU/Linux as a whole doesn't necessary reflects the only "Free
> Software". There are string of OS and licenses that come under the
> umbrella. Particularly, BSD variants kernel and the BSD license.
>
> GPL places lot of restriction, for example, It places restrictions on
> derivative work, whether in whole or in part. This essentially means
> that the GPL infects, like a hereditary condition or in other word
> GPL'ed programs must also be GPL'ed! There are modified version of GPL
> like GPL linking exception, Lesser GPL  (LGPL)  ease some of the
> serious  viral infection clause.
>
> The BSD license fits perfectly in both proprietary commercial and FOSS
> world. In certain extend, It gives more freedom to proprietary gangs.
> Take an example of Berkeley TCP/IP, used in lots of commercial product
> including Windows. Proprietary Industry incorporate it for sole
> purpose thus saving time and increasing productivity. Similar example
> with Mach/FeeBSD which MacOSX is using.  The good part of BSD being
> friendly with proprietary world is it nowhere place any restrictions
> on derivative works.  The license restrictions are placed only on the
> original work. I do agree there are some serious caveats /loophole in
> BSD, makes a bad choice for hardcore FOSSian.  However it still
> maintain a bridge between proprietary and opensource world whereas GPL
> divides two different realm and waging war of ideology. In BSD, both
> are happy and healthy.
>
> Interestingly, we have Mozilla Public License which exploits both BSD
> and GPL. A hybrid sort of. We all like to make two best license in
> one. Now, the best I can say is MPL.
>
> Its upto individual to select or create new License. There are so many
> licenses. The sole purpose of OpenSource License is to share ideas,
> knowledge and protect the freedom.
>
> --
> Sarose
>

I agree with what you say - that is I agree with what you mean to say.

But, I don't agree with your choice of the word "restrictive" on GPL.
Actually, GPL doesn't allow anyone to "restrict" the freedom.  Do you
want to call that as a restriction ?

Let me stop here.  I think we have deviated enough from the OP.

regards,
Prasanna David

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
FOSS Nepal mailing list: [email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/foss-nepal
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Community website: http://www.fossnepal.org/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to