Subject: Re: [openip] Re: GNU License for Hardware
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 15:00:01 -0600 (MDT)

    It forces you to release all your stuff which is in someway combined 
    with the GNU stuff as GPL, too.

    Most people prefer 'free' software where the author states: "you can do
    what
    ever you want provided you leave this notice intact".
    ...

    In fact I prefer a community source licence, which enforces everyone,
    who is earning money with my stuff, to fund me and allows every one, who
    simply want to use it for non commercial purpose, to use it 'for free'.

Please tell me if I understand you properly.  Here is what
you seem to be saying.

* You want to make your software non-free, with a license like Sun's
  non-free license.  (That would mean we have to reject it.)

* You want US to release OUR software in a different way.
  You want us to use non-copyleft lax licenses
  which let you use our code in your non-free software.

* But you have no intention of letting us use your code
  in our free software packages.

It seems you want a system where you impose restrictions on everyone
else, for your profit, while the rest of us bend over backwards to
cater to you.  Surely you must be aware that that is quite
asymmetrical.

I use the GPL to insist that we have a fair relationship, at least as
regards use of my code.  If you want to use my code, you have to let
me use yours.  Fair is fair.

    I have not the finacial background to work years for free an than giving 
    away my software for free. 

(Free software does not mean you have to "give it away for free".
Free software is a matter of freedom, not price.)

You're saying you cannot write free software because you are not rich.

When I started the GNU Project, I was not rich.
Most people who work on free software are not rich.
If you don't know this is possible, ask some people and find out.

If you really wish to write free software, try to find a way,
and maybe you will succeed.  Even if you don't succeed completely,
you may succeed partly.  If you live cheaply, as I did and still do,
you ought to be able to make a living by working half-time or less
as a programmer.  Even if that job involves making proprietary software,
you could still write free software the other half of your time.
Doing good for society with half of your work is better than doing
no good at all.