[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: > > But GPL software due to the nature of the license requires the code > > be released and that's what I mean by "open-source". > > > > Again, please stop confusing the Free Software movement with the Open > > Source movement. They are two different movements, with two different > > goals; and we do not wish to be confused with them. > > > > Like I tried to explain, I mean something different by "open-source" > than > you do, just like I do with "automatic" and "force" and I tried to > define it: > "open source" in my mind means having the source code available, > as opposed to "closed source" meaning the source code is withheld. > > > The GNU GPL does not require you to release anything. It requires you > > that if you distribute or modify code licensed under the GNU GPL, then > > you must abide by that license. It also requires that if you > > distribute works based on GNU GPL licensed code, then those people who > > recive copies must recive the same rights as you have to run, study, > > distribute and modify the program. > > > > Oh, so one distributes the _combined work_ as GPL right? > > > > Again, you do not give up any right to the original code, you are > > > still the copyright holder of it. If you use someone elses code, > > > then you must abide by that liecnse; in this case the GNU GPL. > > > > That's what I mean! If I want to use the other person's code I have > > to agree to the license, which requires me to give up some rights, > > to "pay" so to speak, or not use it at all. > > > > You do not give up any rights, you are still the copyright holder. > > You can license your code in whatever way you wish. But it is no > > longer just your code if you incoperate someone else copyrighted > > works. > > > > Oh, it's part of the _combined work_ right, which is treated as a > distinct work. The original code is still mine. I didn't give up any > rights to it, I just distributed a particular program based on it under > a particular license. > > Thanks. > > > Again, this has been explained many times to you. > > Well I guess I didn't quite understand it, and now I do. And if it > was deep in all those posts where people are responding to > each other here (other than me), I would never have seen it > because there's jsut too many of them for me to want to > sit through it and some contained legalese and discussions I > could _not_ follow without devoting more time than I wanted > to. I only looked at those posts in direct response to mine or > at most 1 level below them, and I couldn't quite grasp what > was going on. > > Maybe GNU isn't as bad as I thought. Thanks for the > answers.
Well there's been no response so I guess I'm right on all my conclusions now. Thanks for the answers. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
