Still no new license -- but draft text available

[Gary Momarison]

Courageous <jkraska1 at san.rr.com> writes:

> Stallman has fairly well soured on his whole "copyleft" notion
> anyway.

Please tell us where we'd find some evidence of that welcome news.


Comment on the previous post: The "obsession" that motivates copyleft
and which draws so many to the GPL is an obsessional desire for
FAIRNESS, which Stallman's propaganda UNFAIRLY exploits and which, like
his promotional misuse of the software freedom concept, is less well
achieved by the GPL than by old-Python, BSD, X11, and similar licenses.

A suprising number of people are captivated by the thought that someone
should only be allowed to use their work if that someone will
reciprocate.  Everyone feels a bit of outrage when someone refuses to
share equaly, but it's sad to find that so few can stiffle that
uncivilized emotion and share unconditionaly, especially when so many
seem so proud of their generosity in using the GPL.  And what is fair
about exchanging the disclosure of my office suite for the use of your
word counting routine?

Stallman's obsession probably started as a desire to minimize/maximize
the amount of software he wasn't/was allowed to control (he was
frustrated by MIT and others) which quickly morphed also to a desire to
minimize/maximize the amount of closed/open code (which he erroneously
referred to (and got others to refer to) as proprietary/free code). But
the method of implementing the obsession is to propagandize about things
like the supposed freedom of the software and the horrors of letting
someone use (even PROFIT - oh, the humanity) YOUR open code as part of 
their closed code.  That's followed up by a plea for the abolition of
copyright (where the GPL won't be able to keep your code out of closed
code). Go figure.