GPL - long

GPL - long

[Nicolai Hanssing]

> > Regarding the GPL, as was previously said, there is information in the
> > new GPL FAQ linked off the front page at www.gnu.org.  In particular
> > you will want to look at the questions,
> >
> >   "If a library is released under the GPL (not the LGPL), does that mean
> that
> >    any program which uses it has to be under the GPL?"
> >
> > and
> >
> >   "What if my school might want to make my program into its own
> proprietary
> >    software pro 

OK, I've read up on the faq, and on the why-not-lgpl...

I've normally haven't cared about the licenses, but as I'm probally not
far off from a real job, the diferences between GPL ang LGPL begins to
make a difference.

Now heres my two cents about the issue [sorry if they hae been posted
before]:

I'm a great supporter of free software, primarily I think *"the more the
better"*.

I also do not mind commercial software - money makes the world go round
y'know, and I also have a problem with the "Them vs. us"-style used in the
why-not-lgpl-document. Free software is an alternative to commercial, and
the other way around. I say, let the market decide.

Now when licensing something under GPL, that forces any company to *not*
use the software, but more importantly [from my view], it also forces them
to *not* contribute to the development.

Instead when using LGPL, a compyny may use the software, and may only
distribute modified versions under LGPL, i.e. they have to commit the
source, and that would also be an advantage for a company in many cases.

Therefor GPL inhibits my primary goal of more,better, free software, and
LGPL promotes it...

GPL only makes sense if:
You are *against* commercial software - I'm not.
You are against your software being used to make money - it's free - who
cares?

In the case of my thesis, I sadly cannot recommend GSL to the firm, but
must recommend that they go with some other pakage [Matlab or
something]. Nor will I recommend GNU/Linux to any of there applications -
theres just not enough clarity, and too much is licensed GPL...

Neither can I expect
that I in the future will be able to use GPL-projects at work, nor commit
to them.

I do hope that GSL someday will become LGPL, so that it won't just remain
a .edu/.org thing - and not just leave the market to Mathworks and the
likes. Thereby also broadening the potential developer-base.

Anyhow I still think it's a cool project :-), and while working on my
thesis I can still contributed - luckily.

Regards
	Nicolai Hanssing
	Denmark

 

Re: GPL - long

[Brian Gough]

Nicolai Hanssing writes:
 > I've normally haven't cared about the licenses, but as I'm probally not
 > far off from a real job, the diferences between GPL ang LGPL begins to
 > make a difference.
 > 
 > I also do not mind commercial software - money makes the world go round
 > y'know, and I also have a problem with the "Them vs. us"-style used in the
 > why-not-lgpl-document. Free software is an alternative to commercial, and
 > the other way around. I say, let the market decide.

Yes, free software and proprietary software compete in the market,
which is why we don't give our products free to our competitors!

We only give our products free to our end-users, and to application
developers who are in an alliance with us using the GPL.

You can find details of our business plan at

  http://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html