Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756120AbXIQPZk (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Sep 2007 11:25:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755940AbXIQPZ1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Sep 2007 11:25:27 -0400 Received: from despair.weirdnet.nl ([193.202.115.165]:21878 "EHLO despair.weirdnet.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755821AbXIQPZX (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Sep 2007 11:25:23 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 615 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 11:25:22 EDT Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 17:15:05 +0200 From: Paul de Weerd To: Adrian Bunk Cc: "Can E. Acar" , misc@openbsd.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Hazelton , Eben Moglen , Lawrence Lessig , "Bradley M. Kuhn" , Matt Norwood Subject: Re: Wasting our Freedom Message-ID: <20070917151505.GV18186@despair.weirdnet.nl> References: <46ED7A8F.1020304@pro-g.com.tr> <20070916195909.GA18232@stusta.de> <20070916203926.GA17863@schlund.de> <20070916211351.GB18232@stusta.de> <20070917092019.GC23002@schlund.de> <20070917133845.GJ18232@stusta.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="aX6oBa4COn3eIhlv" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070917133845.GJ18232@stusta.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.12-2006-07-14 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1989 Lines: 55 --aX6oBa4COn3eIhlv Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 03:38:45PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: | It's not about lazyness of BSD developers, many people who consider the= =20 | BSD licence more free than the GPL argue that the advantage of the BSD=20 | licence is that it does not require you to give back. |=20 | Something is wrong if your licence text clearly states that you do not=20 | require getting anything back but you then argue on moral grounds that | something has to be given back. Something is wrong if your licence text clearly states that you MUST give back, but then you don't return the favour on grounds that "hey, they don't require it, so we don't have to". It may be perfectly legal, but it's "interesting" to say the least. No, you do not have to give back. But weren't you open source / free software developers ? Why did you pick the GPL ? Because you didn't want someone to run of with your code ? You wanted code to be given back ? Why not do it yourself ? By not giving back you're giving a strange signal. Paul 'WEiRD' de Weerd PS: Yes, I know .. but your "giving back" attaches new strings that weren't there in the first place. --=20 >++++++++[<++++++++++>-]<+++++++.>+++[<------>-]<.>+++[<+ +++++++++++>-]<.>++[<------------>-]<+.--------------.[-] http://www.weirdnet.nl/ =20 --aX6oBa4COn3eIhlv Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (OpenBSD) iD8DBQFG7pn5mw12l2HFcK0RApeXAJ9ADdZL8MPw+6MSOX4vDHesdL+KFgCfeJHx aSNPg4O5a9OOwVAjs+E0+PE= =4tGG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --aX6oBa4COn3eIhlv-- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/