On 01/09/08 16:44, Kevin Wilcox wrote:
> I don't think either of you have a firm grasp of what's being said with

quoted text
> regards to selling free software. Or of the GPL in general.

http://webster.com/dictionary/selling
http://webster.com/dictionary/free
http://webster.com/dictionary/software
> The use of the word free has nothing to do with price, it is that the

quoted text
> recipient of a piece of software has the freedom to modify the software

> as they see necessary so that it does what they want it to do.

If you mean that, don't use the word free.
> To

quoted text
> accomplish this, they should receive the source to said software. That's

> what the GPLv2 is all about - providing the recipient of a piece of

> software with the source code to that software and the freedom to modify

> it as they desire.

Sorry, after reading and understanding GPL itself I never put much

time in "understanding" subsequent versions...
But I do understand that the word "free", as in
http://webster.com/dictionary/free
Has nothing to do with it. Nice to know.
> It is only once they decide to *further distribute*

quoted text
> the software that they are restricted. At that point the only

> restrictions placed on them is that they provide the source - thereby

> giving the recipient the same rights bestowed upon them by *their*

> provider.

Come on, what a details, if it's not free as in
http://webster.com/dictionary/free
and is about open source software as in:
http://webster.com/dictionary/software
none of the subscribers of this list is interested any more. I'm sorry

if this shocks you.
> No one has said that you can't charge whatever you like for your

quoted text
> software *or* that you have to give the code away to the world - they

> are saying that if you provide a binary then you should provide the

> recipients of that binary with the corresponding source and the right to

> change it and distribute it as they see fit.

Well, I presume that after GPLv4 were you wrote now "No one" should be

written "Richard Stallman and his cronies".
Richard Stallman's ideas clearly point at robbing software writers, if

software writers "hide" their work behind webservices he will

definitely introduce GPLv4 for it.
..
> In no way is anyone saying "you can't make a comfortable living writing

quoted text
> code" and that you have to go through life as a beggar.

If my profession is writing software and I was so stupid to start

concentrating on GPL software it's very difficult to make a living. I

know Richard&Co like to point at a handful of jobs at

IBM+Redhat+Microsoft but I cannot take that serious at all.
+++chefren