wxPython Licence vs GPL

[Steven D'Aprano]

On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 20:54:55 -0500, Mike Meyer wrote:

> Steven D'Aprano <steve at REMOVETHIScyber.com.au> writes:
>> On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 16:00:29 -0500, Mike Meyer wrote:
>> The GPL doesn't restrict distribution. I don't understand where
>> people get this bizarre view of the GPL from.>
> 
> It happens because people say things like:
> 
>> If you don't like that clause, you have two very simple options: don't
>> redistribute the GPLed software. Or use some other software provided under
>> a different licence.

If you don't want to redistribute the GPLed software, then don't. Nobody
can force you to. I use lots of GPL software which I don't redistribute.

But if you *do* redistribute it, then you must live up to conditions in
the licence. If you aren't willing to do that, use software with a
different licence. 

You are free to redistribute it for free, or charge a bazillion dollars.
You can choose to only redistribute to people with green hair. The only
restriction is that you can't give those people fewer, weaker rights than
you got: having got the software from you, you can't prevent those green
haired people from distributing it to anyone they like, even baldies or
brunettes.

Unlike proprietary licences, the GPL doesn't prohibit you from
redistributing the software, nor does it make you count licences. It
doesn't prohibit you from distributing the software to people who haven't
paid a licence fee, or to people with eleven fingers. 

I would still like to find out what sense of "restricting distribution"
you think the GPL does. As near as I can tell, the only sense that the GPL
restricts distribution is that if you redistribute GPLed code you must not
take away the rights you were granted from those you distribute too.


-- 
Steven.