Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!192.94.214.100!shemesh.hq.tis.com!troma.rv.tis.com!not-for-mail From: mark@troma.rv.tis.com (Mark Sienkiewicz) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.unix.bsd.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy Subject: Re: Linux vs whatever Date: 31 Jan 1997 18:27:35 -0500 Organization: A poorly-installed InterNetNews site Lines: 55 Message-ID: <5ctv57$sre@troma.rv.tis.com> References: <32DFFEAB.7704@usa.net> <5cmiv4$iuf@garuda.synet.net> <5cmvnk$kkh@cynic.portal.ca> <5cr297$ied@garuda.synet.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: troma.rv.tis.com Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.misc:155425 comp.os.linux.networking:66840 comp.os.linux.setup:94842 comp.unix.bsd.misc:2176 comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:51513 comp.os.os2.advocacy:264704 In article <5cr297$ied@garuda.synet.net>, Dave Bodenstab <imdave@synet.net> wrote: >In article <5cmvnk$kkh@cynic.portal.ca>, >Curt Sampson <cjs@cynic.portal.ca> wrote: >>In article <5cmiv4$iuf@garuda.synet.net>, >>Dave Bodenstab <imdave@synet.net> wrote: >> >>>Then why did you add the 500 lines of GPL'ed code? >> >>In fact I didn't, because of the licence. I spent time re-writing >>that code that I would have otherwise spent on writing software to >>the community. So, due to the GPL, the community lost 500 lines of >>free software. >> >You made a decision based on your needs -- no problem. I'm afraid >I don't follow the reasoning in your last sentence; the 500 lines >of GPL'ed code that you had considered using are still there, and >are still available to the cummunity. In what sense are they ``lost''? He wrote 500 lines of new code to do the same thing that was already written, but was GPL'ed. He *could* have written 500 lines of new functionality. If the original code had a BSD style license, he would have used it and he *would* have written something new. >If you were planning to release the product to the "community" anyway >(if not, then how would the "community" lose anything) then the GPL >shouldn't have been a problem in the first place. If you're suggesting >that the time you spent on your proprietary product took time away from >an altogether different ``free'' product... well, that's life. I'm sure If he releases them under the BSD style license, *I* can use them in *my* proprietary product. If he releases them under GPL, I cannot. I benefit more from him releasing his code under the BSD style license than if he releases it under GPL. And, yes, I have personally made money by making modifications to BSD code for commercial use. This whole thread is whether somebody writing free code wants to allow me to do that. The two answers are: BSD: I give you this for free because I want to make the world a better place ; you can do what you want with it. GPL: I give you this for free because I want to make the world a better place ; you may not make it your own and sell it. Ultimately, I am glad that NetBSD does not have GPL code in the kernel, just in case I decide to start "Akbar and Jeff's Discount Router Hut" or something like that someday. This nice gift they gave me could be the difference that makes it economically viable.