1 |
On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 08:26:37AM +0200, Vitaly Kushneriuk wrote: |
2 |
> > What _real_ difference does it make? The only difference is that |
3 |
> > Gentoo Technologies, Inc. can't relicense it and make a closed-source |
4 |
> > version. However, if it was possible for them, and if they did, everybody |
5 |
> > could just ignore them and continue working on the last version released |
6 |
> > under the GPL. |
7 |
> The point is not that you can't fork the project. You'r right at that |
8 |
> you always can, if it's licensed under GPL. The point is preserving |
9 |
> the future "free" status of _all_ derivative works as well. If you don't |
10 |
> care about that, you can just put all the work in "public domain". |
11 |
|
12 |
But all of a sudden I have to trust you? You won't trust Gentoo, why should |
13 |
anybody want to trust eachother then? If people keep the copyright to them- |
14 |
selves, it would mean that small pieces of Gentoo could fall into proprie- |
15 |
tary status. If the majority of people are so paranoid that they won't trust |
16 |
Gentoo Technologies, Inc. with a few ebuilds, the only solution would be to |
17 |
make a "Gentoo Social Contract" or some sorts, where it would be guaranteed |
18 |
that Gentoo will always be Free Software. But if you can't make the leap of |
19 |
faith and trust Daniel Robbins when he says Gentoo will always be Free, why |
20 |
would you trust such a document? |
21 |
|
22 |
Anyway, once I get around to contributing to this fine project, I won't have |
23 |
any problem assigning my copyright to Gentoo. It's the least I can do in |
24 |
return for getting such a nice distribution. |
25 |
|
26 |
-- |
27 |
Best Regards |
28 |
Kenneth Vestergaard Schmidt |