Still no new license -- but draft text available

[John W. Stevens]

Rainer Deyke wrote:
> 
> "John W. Stevens" <jstevens at basho.fc.hp.com> wrote in message
> news:39931449.6C9C6AEA at basho.fc.hp.com...
> > Gary Momarison wrote:
> > > 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.
> >
> > The whole point of the GPL is indeed fairness.  I don't see how BSD, or
> > the X11 licenses, or the old-style Python license, achieve this end as
> > well as the GPL/LGPL do.
> >
> > > 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.
> >
> > Umm . . . no.  The GPL/LGPL is based on a very simple concept: if you
> > are of a cooperative mentality, use the L\GPL license, and use L\GPL
> > code.  If you aren't a cooperative type, don't use 'em.
> 
> That is an oversimplification.

As was the message I was responding to.  If you want a more in depth
discussion of these issues, RMS has some of his writings available on
line.

> I write shareware games.  I distribute my games for free through the
> internet, and charge for the password which unlocks the full game.  If I
> distributed the source code for my games for free under the GPL, there would
> be no incentive for anyone to register since anybody could just remove the
> password check and release the result.

Raising the question, of course, of whether or not you should be talking
about shareware in a discussion re: the GPL . . .

> This is clearly not an option I'm
> willing to take.  I guess you could dismiss me as uncooperative.

Yes, in respect to this one system, I would say you've chosen not to
cooperate.

Note: "chosen", and "in respect to this one system".

> HOWEVER, I am not opposed to cooperation.

I didn't say you were.

> I have contributed in minor ways
> to several open source projects.

And in those cases, you've chosen to cooperate, yes?

> I have posted some of my own source code
> in answer to questions on usenet.  I have even considered cloning LGPL
> project and releasing the result as open source with a more generous
> license.

I warn you, one man's "generous", is another man's "stealing". 
Personally, I can't imagine anybody who takes the GPL to heart caring
one way or the other if you did something like this, so long as you
acknowledge your source.

I've thought about taking projects released under the BSD license,
cloning them, then releasing them under the more generous GPL license. 
Such is life . . .

-- 

If I spoke for HP --- there probably wouldn't BE an HP!

John Stevens
jstevens at basho.fc.hp.com