On Aug 20, 8:32 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED](none) (Byron Jeff) wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > > mike3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Hi. > > >It seems the GNU licenses are designed so you can't just monopolize > >off someone else's work -- rip it off and pilfer it for your profit, > > Profit has nothing to do with it. You can sell GPL software for profit. > You can even sell someone else's GPL software for profit. > > >which is what incorporating it into a proprietary package without > >making that free would do. > > Free="no money" or Free="source available downline"? GPL has no bearing > on the first, and only a bearing on the second if you get someone else's > software under the GPL. > > >This may be good, but what is the GNU > >position on monopolizing or reaping a profit off licensing your OWN > >work? > > It's YOUR work. Why would the GPL have a position on that? GNU as an > organization wants all software to be freely available (free="source > available"). But they can't impose that want on you as a developer of > your own code. > > It seems like you come here and keep asking the same question over and > over. What exactly are you trying to figure out? If it's your code, you > can do what you want with it. GNU may want all code to be freely source > available, but they can't impose that upon anyone. The GPL specifically > defines the rights and responsibilities of a person who is distributing > a codebase that has GPL licensed code that they did not write. That's > all. No profit involved nor nothing about original code. > > BAJ
I was discussing here if the FSF or similar try to go after anyone who uses a "proprietary" distribution model to further their own agendas. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
