Subject: Re: Get ready....
From: "R. L. Kleeberger" <rlk@cinternet.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 23:29:35 -0400

Quoting Derek J. Balling (dredd@megacity.org):
> At 11:09 PM 4/14/99 -0400, R. L. Kleeberger wrote:
> >I was commenting on the suggestion that a developer should be able to take
> >excerpts from the GNU GPL and place them word for word into his own
> >license.  I do not know if this is already legally possible, but if it is
> >not, I would think it not such a great idea unless all the freedoms of the
> >GNU GPL were preserved in the created license.
> 
> Why SHOULDN'T they be able to use portions of the GPL? What if you're a
> commercial entity who simply cannot live with some of the restrictions of
> the GPL but you want most of the benefits. You would make them reword all
> the rest of the GPL in their own words, (probably boning the intent
> bigtime). That makes little sense. 

There is no reason anymore.  I was still unsure whether the GNU GPL was able
to be legally modified into another license.  It seems it is legal,
therefore I don't have much of a buttress accept a philosophical one.  And
this list is ot for philosophical discussion.

> >> The only true freedom you have is choice -- the choice of not using
> >> software if you cannot abide by its license agreement, or developing your
> >> own application using the license of your choice to compete with the
> >> offending product.
> >But, which is the lesser crime.  To damage an sacrifice an individual's
> >freedom for the benefit of the people at large?  Or to sacrifice the
> >people's freedom in benefit of the individual?
> 
> You probably would also support random search and seizure of peoples'
> homes, since it is better to sacrifice the individual's freedom for the
> benefit of the people at large. 

No, I do not.

> Allowing someone to use portions of a license does NOT deny people freedom.
> It is simply not necessarily granting them privileges the same privileges
> as others choose to. Let's remember that any alteration of a copyrighted
> work is a PRIVILEGE, not a right. It is something which is granted by the
> owner of the copyrighted work, NOT something which you inherently have by
> being alive. Rights CANNOT be taken away, privileges can. I can say that
> "no future versions of my software will be released under the GPL", and you
> no longer have the privilege of copying the code.

I disagree.  If you would like to further this thread in private, I would
love to, but let's keep it off the list.

> The sooner you stop confusing "rights" and "privileges", you'll be a lot
> better equipped for the discussion. :)

;) * .01

-- 
rlk@cinternet.net
http://www.cinternet.net/~rlk
"Revision is the soul of wit, for without it, brevity is hard to find."--Joe