> in my opinion GPL type licenses are in fact not free, as u are
> not free to sell software that uses GPL licenced software.
False. The GPL says nothing about selling software, and GPL
licensed programs have been sold quite well in the past, and
continue to be sold (see various Linux distributions etc.).
You are confusing that with the argument that the GPL does not
allow you to make your code non-free - i.e. it does not allow you
to modify the code and just distribute it in binary form without
available source code, giving others less freedom than you had
when you received the program.
That is an old argument frequently brought forth, and relies on a
basic philosophical problem about "freedom": In a "totally free
society", are you allowed to take the freedom of someone else?
Whether you can or can not, either way, it doesn't appear to be
"totally free."
The GPL requires you to keep software Free (not as in "no cost",
but "freedom") if you modify it. In the philosophical paradoxon,
it chooses the option that you can _not_ remove the freedom of
someone (something) else. The BSD licenses choose the option that
you _can_ remove the freedom. Arguing which one is "more free" is
missing the basic problem.
Regards,
-- Jorgen
_______________________________________________
gobolinux-devel mailing list
gobolinux-devel@lists.gobolinux.org
http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-devel
