Freeware Python editor

[Delaney, Timothy]

> From: DeepBlue [mailto:DeepBlue at DeepBlue.org]
> "Magnus Lie Hetland" <mlh at idi.ntnu.no> wrote in message
> news:9rulu9$n2m$1 at tyfon.itea.ntnu.no...
> > "Oleg Broytmann" <phd at phd.pp.ru> wrote in message
> > news:mailman.1004711703.24605.python-list at python.org...
> > [snip]
> > > And after you've modified it - do you have
> > > rights to distribute it to your friends?
> >
> > I hope you are not claiming that what you said above is 
> something peculiar
> > to Free (as in Gnu/FSF) Software? It would also apply to Open Source
> > software. (And, yes, people would be allowed to make non-open-source
> > software based on it, and _that_ software might not be free in any
> > sense.)
> >
> This is contested.  check the issue with Virtual Dub.  An open source
> project.
> Someone used the code to produce an **unopen application.  
> Virtual Dub guy
> does not like and he is threatening to sue.
> What you describe is called theft.
Actually, Avery Lee had licensed VirtualDub under the GPL. Vidomi had
produced software which used code from VirtualDub and had not released the
source according to the requirements of the licenses.

Vidomi tried to pull a fast one (perhaps not intentionally) by having the
GPL code in a dynamically-linked library that was required for correct
operation of their software. They thought they could get away with it
because it was dynamically linked. However, the important part was that
their software could not work properly without the GPL code - hence it was
an integral part.

The issue has now been resolved to the satisfaction of Vidomi, Avery and the
FSF.

Just trying to reduce the FUD. Personally, I am not overly in favour of the
GPL (I think it reduces the likelihood of code being reused) and much prefer
BSD-style licenses. However, I will respect whatever license someone chooses
to put their code under - even if that means that I will not use their
(possibly very useful) code.

Tim Delaney