>Have you considered the LGPL? I dont know the exact differences over the
>GPL off the top of my head, except that it is lighter. I think it doesnt
>include some of the loopholes you are talking about.
LGPL may well be a wonderful thing - I don't know. The bigger question is:
Why is free (as in 'no-strings-attached') bad? In what way does me acting
as apostle for Gnu's belief system benefit me, or for that matter, anyone
other than Gnu?
If I write a bit of code which is useful (primarily and) mainly to users of
a bit of software which is GPL - I apparently lose my rights to let people
make money with my code. I spend vast proportions of my life doing things
which make me happy - why shouldn't chremetists be allowed the same basic
It seems to me that GPL is not much short of a psuedo-political power
struggle which persues the end of imposing upon 'the masses' the neccessity
to conform to a single belief system - just like Jesus, Bush, Blair and
many others before them.
Of course, that is purely _my_ view on this one subject, and others must
also be allowed the right to choose, unimpinged, any moral code they also
wish to put their faith/belief in
...So long as it causes no harm to others - LOL ...cos that's what _I_
That possibly got a off-topic toward the end, but as it was a full and
honest answer to a reasonable question asked of me on the group, I hope it
was also appropriate to reply here.
PS. Just an after-thought: If *I* want to use (portions of) my code, which
has been copy-left infected, in a commercial product... do I also lose the
rights to what was originally my own "Intellectual Property"?
Received on Tue Jan 11 17:38:47 2005