begin  quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] as of Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 01:10:28PM -0700:
> > I'm talking about re-releasing it as GPL'd software, so anyone else who
> > uses the code will be bit by the GPL virus, unless they manage to track
> > down the original sources (assuming they learn enough about it to look).
> >
> > It just reflects the depths to which the GPL advocates will go to
> > get "all software released under the GPL".  This is a problem I have
> > with the GPL ideology... it wants to infect everything: no variation
> > allowed (in the long run).  Ideology, not practicality, fairness, or
> > morality, is the driving force.
> 
> Are you concerned about BSD software being "vulnerable" to being
> rereleased as GPL software but *not* concerened about any
> moocher rereleasing it as proprietary software?
 
Well, I've yet to encounter a proprietary moocher looking for anything
public domain so it can be rereleased under a proprietary license.

This isn't "Oh, I want to use the code in my GPL software." This was
"Oh, I want to make a big collection of GPL software, so I'm finding
any and all public domain software I can and releasing it under the
GPL."

Obviously they're _allowed_ to do so. 

A moocher using public domain code for their product is using the code
for a good reason.  A moocher using public domain code to increase the
code "released under the GPL" doesn't care about the code, they're just
trying to amass as much code as possible under the GPL.

-Stewart "Presumably because it's shiny." Stremler

Attachment: pgpwfGjePmQVa.pgp
Description: PGP signature

-- 
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list

Reply via email to