On Thu, 7 Dec 2006, Andy Sy wrote:
As I have made clear countless times, I am not saying
copyleft style provisions are unfair nor am I against
them, only that it is very disingenuous to characterize
it as giving someone more freedom. How can something
with strings attached be considered more "free" than
something without???
By keeping the software and source code free. The problem with BSD-style
licenses is that it allows commercial companies to take the work of others
and use it to make proprietary software, with all the bad monopolistic and
unfair effects that non-free software brings, and without contributing
anything back to the community it took the software from. Free softwasre
addresses that discrepancy. It keeps the original code free and direct
derivaties (that use GPLed code, for example) free too. The ultimate
effect is to promote and increase freedom.
All I am asking is: Do you believe it is ok for someone or
some entity to charge money for a piece of software whose
source code they do not reveal to the public... ?
If they used GPLed code, then NO. It is totally wrong for them to do so.
Now if the code was theirs, without GPL-likie code used, then the law
allows it, so It's OK in that sense. But we don't have to like it. So in
the sense that it makes things more difficult for FOSS and makes us
wrinkle our noses, it's not ok. But that's subjective, I guess.
God bless!
--[Manny [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Member: Philippine League for Democratic Telecommunications
Alternative Information and Opinion at http://www.phnix.net
Pro-Life Philippines website -- http://www.prolife.org.ph
--[Open Minds Philippines]--------------------[openminds.linux.org.ph]--
_________________________________________________
Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List
[email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph)
Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists
Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
