5 ms·

The “Anyone but Richard M Stallman” (ABRMS) License

22 points by mdturnerphys 11y ago

mdturnerphys 11y ago
I came across this due to a search-engine suggestion when searching for a certain xkcd comic [1]. Previous discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6822005 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6822005 [1] http://www.xkcd.com/225/ http://www.xkcd.com/225/
- the_af 11y ago
  Important: the author comments in that thread and claims it's satire. I think it's in poor taste, but I'm relieved to know this isn't truly intended to be used.
Afforess 11y ago
I aspire to make enough important and influential decisions some day to earn the sort of hatred RMS has.
- Mikeb85 11y ago
  No kidding. Despite the hate, look where open-source was pre-RMS, and where it is now. Look how important GNU tools are, GCC, Linux, and so on...
  - sinxoveretothex 11y ago
    How would we judge that? Per Wikipedia, Stallman wrote the GPLv1 in 1989. I wasn't even born then. Moreover, I doubt this is a good argument. Would the Mill (youtube.com/watch?v=QyzlEYspqTI) be possible using Free Software (consider the GCC exceptions were pushed way too late, circa 2009 per gnu.org https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gcc-exception-3.1.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gcc-exception-3.1.html)? Would Linux even exist without at least BSD having been released? I'm more of a copyleft than a 'BSD libertarian', but I don't think we can look at RMS's contribution by comparing what was before and what is now if for no other reason because it's impossible to separate what is due to copyleft, what is due to BSD-style and what is due to a mixture of both.
informatimago 11y ago
LOL I wonder why the guy doesn't want RMS to use his software, but his ABRMS has the same virality as the GPL! ROFL
- detaro 11y ago
  >It’s not about hating free software. I’m a believer in that; I released my first game for free in 1982. Note that the github thing I put up is essentially totally free (something I would have been restricted from doing, by my employer, up to a year ago). I have a personal dislike for RMS and I think that his philosophy of economy is at best naïve and dangerously unworkable. 25 years ago he was exhorting me to quit my job in protest to support some of his politics and he wasn’t pleasant about it. Thus, ABRMS. from http://www.dadhacker.com/blog/?p=2106 http://www.dadhacker.com/blog/?p=2106. via https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6822190 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6822190
liquidzoot 11y ago
Rude.
shmerl 11y ago
Sounds like a very dumb license.
- vezzy-fnord 11y ago
  Not to mention proprietary.
  - r3bl 11y ago
    How is this proprietary? The license says that you can do anything you want to do with it. This sounds pretty similar to WTFPL[0], and WTFPL is listed[1] as a GPL-compatible free software license by the FSF. 0 - http://www.wtfpl.net/ http://www.wtfpl.net/ 1 - http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#WTFPL http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#WTFPL
    - shmerl 11y ago
      > How is this proprietary? The license says that you can do anything you want to do with it. Exceptions limiting freedom of its usage make it non FOSS.
      - r3bl 11y ago
        Yup, that makes it both open source incompatible and free software incompatible. My mistake. Thanks for pointing that out.
betolink 11y ago
This is a stupid "license"... I rather like the "DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE" that I use from time to time https://github.com/betolink/snowgl https://github.com/betolink/snowgl > http://www.wtfpl.net/txt/copying/ http://www.wtfpl.net/txt/copying/
flatfilefan 11y ago
To be, or not to be- that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer RMS The slings and arrows of outrageous Fortune 500 Or to take arms against a sea of troubles, And by opposing GNU end them.

22 points by mdturnerphys 11y ago

I came across this due to a search-engine suggestion when searching for a certain xkcd comic [1]. Previous discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6822005 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6822005 [1] http://www.xkcd.com/225/ http://www.xkcd.com/225/

the_af 11y ago
Important: the author comments in that thread and claims it's satire. I think it's in poor taste, but I'm relieved to know this isn't truly intended to be used.

Afforess 11y ago

I aspire to make enough important and influential decisions some day to earn the sort of hatred RMS has.

Mikeb85 11y ago
No kidding. Despite the hate, look where open-source was pre-RMS, and where it is now. Look how important GNU tools are, GCC, Linux, and so on...
- sinxoveretothex 11y ago
  How would we judge that? Per Wikipedia, Stallman wrote the GPLv1 in 1989. I wasn't even born then. Moreover, I doubt this is a good argument. Would the Mill (youtube.com/watch?v=QyzlEYspqTI) be possible using Free Software (consider the GCC exceptions were pushed way too late, circa 2009 per gnu.org https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gcc-exception-3.1.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gcc-exception-3.1.html)? Would Linux even exist without at least BSD having been released? I'm more of a copyleft than a 'BSD libertarian', but I don't think we can look at RMS's contribution by comparing what was before and what is now if for no other reason because it's impossible to separate what is due to copyleft, what is due to BSD-style and what is due to a mixture of both.

informatimago 11y ago

LOL I wonder why the guy doesn't want RMS to use his software, but his ABRMS has the same virality as the GPL! ROFL

detaro 11y ago
>It’s not about hating free software. I’m a believer in that; I released my first game for free in 1982. Note that the github thing I put up is essentially totally free (something I would have been restricted from doing, by my employer, up to a year ago). I have a personal dislike for RMS and I think that his philosophy of economy is at best naïve and dangerously unworkable. 25 years ago he was exhorting me to quit my job in protest to support some of his politics and he wasn’t pleasant about it. Thus, ABRMS. from http://www.dadhacker.com/blog/?p=2106 http://www.dadhacker.com/blog/?p=2106. via https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6822190 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6822190

liquidzoot 11y ago

Rude.

shmerl 11y ago

Sounds like a very dumb license.

vezzy-fnord 11y ago
Not to mention proprietary.
- r3bl 11y ago
  How is this proprietary? The license says that you can do anything you want to do with it. This sounds pretty similar to WTFPL[0], and WTFPL is listed[1] as a GPL-compatible free software license by the FSF. 0 - http://www.wtfpl.net/ http://www.wtfpl.net/ 1 - http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#WTFPL http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#WTFPL
  - shmerl 11y ago
    > How is this proprietary? The license says that you can do anything you want to do with it. Exceptions limiting freedom of its usage make it non FOSS.
    - r3bl 11y ago
      Yup, that makes it both open source incompatible and free software incompatible. My mistake. Thanks for pointing that out.

betolink 11y ago

This is a stupid "license"... I rather like the "DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE" that I use from time to time https://github.com/betolink/snowgl https://github.com/betolink/snowgl > http://www.wtfpl.net/txt/copying/ http://www.wtfpl.net/txt/copying/

flatfilefan 11y ago

To be, or not to be- that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer RMS The slings and arrows of outrageous Fortune 500 Or to take arms against a sea of troubles, And by opposing GNU end them.