Subject: Re: terms
From: Brian Bartholomew <bb@wv.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 18:38:46 -0500

> Does this mean that if I write a program which is copyrighted under
> your license program, I now have to buy a CDROM writer and pay for
> the media and shipping for everyone who wants a copy?  Do I have to
> pay for an Internet connection with enough bandwidth to handle the
> FTP load?  Do I have to either spend my own time doing distribution,
> or else pay someone else out of my own pocket for the distribution?

What I had in mind was the identical network of distribution
arrangements that arise with GPL'ed programs.  Suppose I put a new
option on GNU ls and distribute a binary in my Junkware Linux
distribution.  Now I am liable to do the whole CDROM copying thing.
In practice, I send my patch to the ls maintainers and they distribute
it.  My source is available conveniently and for a low price, and
everybody is happy with that.

If I say people can charge reasonable copying fees of a couple hundred
dollars per copy, then software hoarders will charge that much for
every little patch, and the software will be significantly less
available.  Instead, I want to say it's your job to ensure your code
is easily available.  If your code is so awful that no site wants to
carry it, you can put it up on a cheap web site.  There are corners
where you can write 500 Meg of awful code and have to cut CDROMS, yes.
But why optimize for the uncommon case?

> If that were the case, then I'd find writing libre software a lot
> less attractive.			       ^^^^^

Maybe we shouldn't overload libre to refer to this new license.  Can
we call this concept the "no hoarding license" for now?


Another member of the League for Programming Freedom (LPF) www.lpf.org
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Bartholomew - bb@wv.com - www.wv.com - Working Version, Cambridge, MA