2 ms·
Funny that GPL does violate your definition of freedom. Because it doesn't end where my freedom starts. It tries to impose a new license of my software linked t
by _ph_ 7y ago
Funny that GPL does violate your definition of freedom. Because it doesn't end where my freedom starts. It tries to impose a new license of my software linked to the GPL software. And it imposes obligations to the user beyond what the user was given.
- AsyncAwait 7y agoYou do not have the freedom to just take "my" code and do whatever. The moment you include my GPL'd code, you're stepping onto my ground and thus need to abide by some rules I set out for those that do. You're still free to not use my code, but not to do as you wish if you do, because at that moment you're stepping onto my own freedom.
- _ph_ 7y agoI haven't claimed that I am free to do what I wish to do, nor do I ask for that. The point is, that the GPL contradicts what you stated before "yours ends where mine starts". GPL tries to exactly cross that line.
- AsyncAwait 7y agoThe "your end where mine starts" means precisely that your ability to do whatever ends when you decide to use my code, because that is where my freedom to impose certain requirements on your usage of my code starts. There's nothing the GPL tries to cross, that's exactly what that quote means in general society as well. For example, you're free to wear the same shoes you do outside in your own house, but if you're coming into my own house, I have the freedom to require you not to do that.
- _ph_ 7y agoYes you have. Telling me to wear different shoes once I visited your house is something different. So if you think that is a reasonable request, then I have to tell you that I will refrain from visiting your house. And advise others to be very considerate about visiting your house.
- AsyncAwait 7y agoWhat makes telling you to wear different shoes any different? I am just asking you to abide by my rules if you're going to make use of my resources. The GPL does the same. And yes, you're free to refrain from visiting my house if you disagree with what I am asking of you, same as you're free to not use GPL code and therefore not abide by its requirements. The only thing you are not free to do is come to my house and ignore my rules, likewise use GPL code and ignore the GPL. That's it.
- _ph_ 7y agoI don't mind abiding to your rules when I come to your house and while I stay in your house. I find it bizarre that you think that you can impose rules onto me after I left your house and even ask me to impose the rules onto others.
- DanBC 7y agoHow do you feel about NDAs or official secrets?
- _ph_ 7y agoWhat about them? I have no fundamental problem with them. The only reason I would sign an NDA is, when I am doing paid work.
- DanBC 7y agoBut aren't these examples of having to follow someone else's rules after you've left their house?
- _ph_ 7y agoSo what? It is part of the deal, and as I wrote, I would sign an NDA only for a good reason, that is usually a paid job. Also, the NDA concerns only the specific task and not other things I am doing at that time or later.
- ferzul 7y agoyou're free to do anything with gpl software that you would be free to do in the absence of the gpl. consequently it in no way limits any freedom; the freedom has been limited by applicable law. if this is a problem you need to take it up with the relevant legislators in your area. complaining that the fsf or another publisher only returns most of your freedom isn't exactly fair. they have returned most of your freedom but retained the amount that would allow you to restrict someone else's freedom. you only want off them the freedom to restrict someone else's freedom, so it's hypocritical; if there is some benefit to this freedom, then they have fairly exercised it and you lost out. (i find the fsf's argument that dynamic linking is illegal in the absence of a licence a long bow to draw tho.)