Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] few licences, which should exist
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 07:46:47
Message-Id: 1143790545.2248.16.camel@localhost
In Reply to: [gentoo-portage-dev] few licences, which should exist by tvali
1 tvali,
3 This does not have anything to do with portage development. While I
4 appreciate your concerns and ideas I must ask you to stop abusing this
5 mailinglist. Things like this off-topic email and the thread where you
6 replied four times to yourself are not good form and should be avoided
7 (unless you really want us to unsubscribe you from this list)
9 Please try to keep your mails on topic and as concise as possible.
11 Thanks,
12 Patrick
14 On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 00:34 +0300, tvali wrote:
15 > (portage list is maybe the best place to send this, but still, maybe
16 > usable as i dont know lists with such specific purpose -- so sending
17 > it to gentoo list and gnu)
18 >
19 > I have thought about such things:
20 >
21 > 1. Formats like mp3 are put together in such way that basically noone
22 > can use them with a free application. There should be licence, which
23 > grants some file formats an opposite -- that no application, which
24 > supports any commercial file format, must not support them. Then
25 > people who want, may put all their free music up in that format -- or
26 > even licence their music in such way that it's only free as long as it
27 > is used together with it. Goal of such licence would be to give gnu
28 > people the same ways to take their market position, as corporations do
29 > -- this may not seem "nice" to those corporations, but it targets the
30 > problem, i think.
31 >
32 > 1a. Licence, which protects a format against being used in any app,
33 > which supports any poorly documented format like MS word document and
34 > by any product by any company, which owns any such format.
35 >
36 > 2. In many countries there are software patents. I think that there
37 > should be licence against them similar to previous licence -- so that
38 > i may patent my free software in such way that any company, which uses
39 > any commercial patent in it's production, must not use that software
40 > [or, as alternative licence, must pay for it to gnu, licence owner or
41 > anyone that patenter sees as deserving it]. So, not "if used in
42 > commercial products", but "if used by commercial company". Patents may
43 > be also used in different ways -- for example, there may be long list
44 > of things a company *must not do* or *must not be*, if they want to
45 > use the patent.
46 >
47 > I think that there are several kinds of people using gnu licences:
48 > * Those, who actually fight against certain types of licences,
49 > corporative policies etc. and want to protect their work against to be
50 > used in any such project -- maybe even in marketing campain of a
51 > corporation, who is "supporting free software" by taking it's code
52 > into use or just supporting it, like IBM with Red Hat. Those people
53 > may, therefore, even want it to be not given away freely with $40 CD
54 > and book.
55 > * Those, who just dont want their code to be used with any direct
56 > commercial purpose and want it to be open, but dont go too far in
57 > philosophy and let their programming language, for example, be used in
58 > making commercial product.
59 > * Those, who want their code to be free and open and any development
60 > to be free and open, but may say something like "wow our soft is used
61 > even in commercial products".
62 > * Those, who just give it for free to students and schools, for
63 > example.
64 > * Those nasty people who make those "free lite versions", which almost
65 > work and spam all search engines ;)
66 >
67 > Ok, my additions here are -- gnu should think more about those people,
68 > who are actually wanting their code to be propagated only by
69 > freeware-makers and run only in environments, which contain no
70 > commercial products and are not used for any commercial purposes. Ok,
71 > they still contain commercial hardware and people may write their
72 > commercial e-mails in them, but anyway, to have a music format, which
73 > licence does it's best to make it so that you have to *choose between
74 > mp3 and mpfree*, not choose between having both or only free one,
75 > would be good. Freeware builders should have at least one "market",
76 > which uses all nasty microsoft-intel trusted corporate policies to
77 > protect itself against everyone other who use them ;) Such
78 > "corporation" could be nice macintosh to other free products, which
79 > are not so radical in their way (ok, what we would eat, when going too
80 > radical, but still -- Microsoft actually *fights* openoffice, so what
81 > having alternative openoffice format, which is, for example, illegal
82 > to be used on commercial OS or, alternatively, illegal to be used in
83 > any application supporting word doc's).
84 >
85 > --
86 > tvali
87 >
88 >
89 --
90 Stand still, and let the rest of the universe move


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature