1 |
Mike Doty wrote: |
2 |
> Mivz wrote: |
3 |
>>> Mike Doty wrote: |
4 |
>>>> Mivz wrote: |
5 |
>>>>>> Then I have got this one question, I don't need a answer too. |
6 |
>>>>>> |
7 |
>>>>>> How free is free software if you need a lawyer and a expensive server |
8 |
>>>>>> just to be able to publish your addition under your own name? |
9 |
>>>>>> |
10 |
>>>> Very free. There are many project sites that will host your content if |
11 |
>>>> you have it under a GPL or similar license. Similarly, as long as you |
12 |
>>>> provide the source, you satisfy the main point of GPL. Thousands of |
13 |
>>>> projects do exactly this without any input from a lawyer. |
14 |
>>>> |
15 |
>>> But then it's still 'free beer', and not 'freedom'. I still can not |
16 |
>>> write a patch and make a cd with the patch applied to give to my mum and |
17 |
>>> my friends, without the risk of my intelligence being stolen and abused. |
18 |
>>> Or I have to go through the hassle of finding a provider, which of |
19 |
>>> course needs attention too. |
20 |
>>> |
21 |
>>> |
22 |
> Then you miss the entire point of GPL. You "own" your code, but if you |
23 |
> derive it from something that is GPL, then you must comply with the GPL. |
24 |
> The GPL exists to protect the author from what you're trying to do. |
25 |
> Your statement also goes against the whole concept of free software. |
26 |
> you've learned and benefited from all of our work, yet you don't want to |
27 |
> contribute? It's very selfish and childish. |
28 |
|
29 |
With stolen or abuse I do not mean just used. I mean stolen and abused |
30 |
as you would consider GPL licensed software stolen or abused. |
31 |
-- |
32 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |