| Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: And the alternative is...?
Dec 3 2009 on group No FSF! |
Sorry, you haven't read my text. Please read it again. In short:
In one part you are right: The GPL is a license that doesn't prevent you as the copyright holder to to what you want with the code.
But: FSF want to have your copyright IF you contribute to the GNU project (and only in this case.)
So: If you contribute to KDE under GPL, you still have your copyright. If you want to contribute to GNU, you have to give away your copyright to the FSF before your contribution is accepted. And that's not an open behavior! |
|  | | Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: And the alternative is...?
Nov 27 2009 on group No FSF! |
Furthermore, I don't like organizations that tell me what I HAVE to do because they think it is right. FSF claims that we should use of the these linux distributions: http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html
Do you use one of them?
That's what I mean with fanaticism. I will support free software, but not fanaticism.
And I don't like when FSF speaks in the name of "_the_ free software", because they represent only a little part! |
| | | Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: And the alternative is...?
Nov 27 2009 on group No FSF! |
No, it's not the same to contribute to GNU than contribute to KDE etc.
GNU requires you to give your copyright (the right to reproduce the software) away to the FSF. The FSF than licenses the code under for example the GPL. (And if FSF would want this, they could also license it under another license or sell it!) You are loosing all rights - that means that even yourself can't reproduce the code you've written under the license you want. If, for example, you want to license it _additionally_ to GPL also in LPGP, CC or whatever, you can't do this anymore because you don't earn anymore the copyright. You must ask FSF to do it.
In KDE and almost all other projects, that's very different. The code always stays your copyright. You can always license your own code _additionally_ under another license. When you contribute for example to KDE under the LGPL and later you want to use your own code in another project (that has BSD license or CC or even commercial), you can do this, because it is still your code.
Even if you don't make software for GNU directly, there are risks. I would never put "GPL 2/3 or any later" at my code, but only "GPL 2/3". The additional "any later" means, that everybody can use the code under whatever FSF releases as GPL 4, 5... So FSF has the power to decide the content, and they _can_ put there what they want. Another question is if they do, I also can't imagine that they will make GPL 4 a public domain license or a commercial one. However, IF they do it, you can't do anything against this if you've licensed at "GPL 2/3 and any later". - I don't feel good if others can decide what's done with my code. So I always put "licensed under GPL 2/3" to my code, and NOT any later. I want to decide myself under which license my code is available, and I don't trust in FSF to do this for me!!! |
| |
Search people
Current visitors
New users
Birthdays
Most active users
Back
|
|
