[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: propose: `cypherpunks license' (Re: Wanted: Twofish source code)
On Wed, 30 Sep 1998, Richard Stallman wrote:
> It isn't surprising that people who want to write non-free software
> are disappointed that the GNU project won't help them. What is
> amazing is that they feel this is unfair. They have no intention of
> letting me use their source code in my programs--so why should they be
> entitled to use my source code in their programs? These people seem
> to think that their selfishness entitles them to special treatment.
:-) I always find this amusing myself. If people have written code, they are,
by virtue of the fact they have actually done the work, able to enforce their
particular views on the world via their licence, be it a GNU, BSD, Netscape or
other form. The problem sometimes occurs when people put their code out under
a licence they do not fully understand, and does not capture their intent.
I personally have a policy that if I ever change the licence conditions in any
of my code, the last version with the old licence will always be available for
those who don't like the new licence. This way if my opinions on how the
software can be used changes, people don't have to suffer through my
'conversion to a new faith' :-). The will only have access to the old stuff
under the licence they like.
> The GPL is my way of offering a certain kind of cooperation to anyone
> else who is willing to cooperate in the same way.
And the problem that some of us have with the GPL, in that it does take a
rather strong stance on this issue, making it incompatable with other people
who are not that passionate.