tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10160217.post116076949626927528..comments2023-09-20T07:27:22.499-05:00Comments on bluke: closing [loopholes|business models] in OS licensesUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10160217.post-1163521084108840972006-11-14T10:18:00.000-06:002006-11-14T10:18:00.000-06:00Meh. I don't get it. If you're uncomfortale ever p...Meh. I don't get it. If you're uncomfortale ever placing restrictions on recipients of yr code, just public-domain it all and be done with it. This is what I think when you say "the very act of enforcement makes it unfree"<BR/><BR/>You indicate acceptance of GPL (whatever version) by distributing the software licensed thereunder. Nothing else gives you the right to distribute this software, which you did not write. That's because of the copyright laws, not the GPL.<BR/><BR/>Of course the GPL is not freedom. The GPL is a device meant to preserve freedoms. Maybe it sucks at that; maybe it rules. That's a debate worth having.<BR/><BR/>Thought experiment: if software were not copyrightable, and therefore distributable by all without restriction. would the FSF be mad, sad, or glad?<BR/><BR/>I think you would find that free-software developers would love it if they didn't have to leverage copyright law to preserve their users' freedoms.Matt Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09135702087836146475noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10160217.post-1161319969142515522006-10-19T23:52:00.000-05:002006-10-19T23:52:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04844724534003766952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10160217.post-1161319399719491672006-10-19T23:43:00.000-05:002006-10-19T23:43:00.000-05:00I'm not so sure I'd say that GPLv3 - SaaS clause =...I'm not so sure I'd say that GPLv3 - SaaS clause = 100% freedom. Like I said, I have a freedom problem with GPLv2 in that it would REQUIRE me to REQUIRE my users to distribute THEIR enhancements under GPLv2...that's a couple of requirements (non-freedoms) and it stretches beyond even me to my users!?<BR/><BR/>I agree it's unfortunate that there's Yet Another Gift-Economy-License (YAGEL), but I think I'd modify the relationship of "freedom vs. gift economy" ...<BR/><BR/>I'd say it's more like freedom OVER gift economy. Because the two concepts are not necessarily mutually exclusive - a voluntary gift economy is possible. However, what's not possible is to ENFORCE a "free" gift economy - the very act of enforcement makes it unfree.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for coming by and for the great comment.lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04844724534003766952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10160217.post-1161092914752490732006-10-17T08:48:00.000-05:002006-10-17T08:48:00.000-05:00It all results from a misunderstanding over whethe...It all results from a misunderstanding over whether freedoms taken away by copyright are being restored, or whether a quid pro quo is being enforced in support of a misperception that this is the objective of the GPL.<BR/><BR/>It's freedom versus gift economy.<BR/><BR/>If you removed just the SaaS clause, the GPLv3 is 100% freedom based.<BR/><BR/>The APL, and now HPL, are gift economy licenses (you can't modify our stuff unless you publish your mods). Unfortunately, the EUPL has jumped on the gift economy bandwagon and the concept of privacy violation has whizzed over its head.Crosbie Fitchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06554471152790988479noreply@blogger.com