0

http://www.itwire.com

For the second time in six months, a flamefest has broken out between those who release software under the BSD (Berkely Software Distribution) licence and others who release software under the General Public Licence.

Full story »
extra's picture
Created by extra 17 years 4 weeks ago – Made popular 17 years 4 weeks ago
Category: Legal   Tags:
spikeb's picture

spikeb

17 years 4 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago

0

because it's a fight between free

because it's a fight between free software and copyleft

kjakobsen's picture

kjakobsen

17 years 4 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago

0

Well metaphorically speaking, its

Well metaphorically speaking, its either a society without rules. Or a society with a constitution, that guaranties each citizen certain liberties.

Copyleft is also free software, but free software is not always copylefted.

aboutblank's picture

aboutblank

17 years 4 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago

0

People do not know about user subjugation.

People do not know about user subjugation. Basically the BSD people find it acceptable if people subjugate others with their software. People that subscribe to the idea that it is not right to subjugate users from practising the four freedoms will use GPL. This is because it is the embodiment of the concept of how software should be shared in licence form.

dave's picture

dave

17 years 4 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago

0

I find that most people arguing

I find that most people arguing against the GPL are placing themselves in the shoes of the distributor rather than the end user when considering these issues.

The whole point of the GPL is to protect the end users' right to freedom... not the distributor's freedom to take the end user's freedom.

What we want is to protect the people being abused not assist the people who want to do the abusing.

akf's picture

akf

17 years 4 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago

0

Please keep in mind, that the code

Please keep in mind, that the code the BSD people moan about was dual-licensed. It explicitly said, that you can choose to redistribute it under the GPL. — That's why I don't understand it. The kernel people IMHO just did, what the author allowed them to do. Or is there something I'm missing?

By the way, I am a GPL fan. But that doesn't mean that I am against the BSD license.

Best karma users