Re: Using GPL for LibGTop with an exception for the GNOME Project

[Damien Miller <dmiller ilogic com au>]

On Mon, 22 Feb 1999, Miguel de Icaza wrote:

> 
> > If there was a version of the GPL which did not discriminate against
> > other free licenses I could be convinced otherwise.
> 
> It is not a matter of discriminating other free licenses.  It is a way
> of increasing the pool of free software assets.

I am aware of the GPLs intent, and agree with it (I GPL my own
software). Unfortunatly the very restrictions that make it so
effective also make it impossible to use with other licenses which are
just as (if not more so) free and which people often have very good
reasons for using.

> We are working for free (as in we do not get money from our work) and
> the reason for which I use the GPL is because we do not want our work
> to be used in a setup in which we will be deprived from a derivative
> work of us.  
> 
> Let me cite you a number of examples in which I think companies have
> used a large ammount of free software code and have locked users into
> using their proprietary software without granting us any of the free
> software rights:
> 
> 	 1. X11R6.  At least HP, Sun and SGI have improved
>             significantly the X server, and they are not sharing with
>             us all of their improvements.  
> 
> 	    They just have just contributed back what they required to
> 	    keep track of the latest X11R6.
> 
> 	    I have personally been bitten by this.  As in, I was
> 	    working on re-implementing various of the bits that are
> 	    proprietary for Linux.
> 
> 	 2. BSD derivatives and Mach: Companies took BSD and adapted
>             it in various forms to their systems.  Sun, HP, SGI, Sony,
>             DEC have all taken the code, enhanced it and never given
>             back their changes to the developers.
> 
> 	    And I was also bitten by this when I was working on a
> 	    Mach/Sparc port. 
> 
>    I bet there are many other instances where software has gone
> proprietary, and the user was stuck with whatever the company choose
> to provide. 

I understand your frustration, but the question here was "GPL vs 
LGPL", not "GPL vs non-copyleft". The worst thing that can happen
to libGtop is that a proprietry vendor dynamically links to it.

Who knows, this may even serve to educate the vendor.

Regards,
Damien Miller

--
| "Bombay is 250ms from New York in the new world order" - Alan Cox
| Damien Miller - http://www.ilogic.com.au/~dmiller
| Email: dmiller@ilogic.com.au (home) -or- damien@ibs.com.au (work)