On Mon, 2006-06-19 at 10:39 -0500, Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote: > > > > You continue to miss the point. The thing I dislike about the > > GPL is that it prevents distribution of a large amount of > > potentially useful software. That has no bearing on the > > usefulness or my use of the subset that is permitted to > > be distributed. > > > We get you point. But you are missing the point. Here is another way > to look at it - GPL software comes with a price - if you want to > distribute software based on GPL software, the price is sharing your > source code. If you can say that, then you didn't get the point at all. I'm not interested in distributing software. > Then again, if all software had a GPL-compatible license, the > problem would be solved. It doesn't, and can't as long as there are patented technologies where the patent holder requires different licensing. Or if the best implementation is covered by a different copyright. > PS - I know that this is not the normal way of looking at GPL > software, but maybe putting it in these terms will get the point across. The result is that anyone needing any differently licensed component can't get just that piece, the entire work must be proprietary making a net increase in the amount of proprietary code needed. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
