nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Except freedoms are preserved rather than taken away.  You're still free to use
> it in *any way* you want.  And if you want to modify it for yourself or your
> organization.  You just have to comply to the GPL way if you later want to ship
> that modified work, in which case the GPL is enforced so that you don't deny
> others the same rights the GPL offered you.

  There's a contradiction in there.

  If you *have to* comply to something before you can distribute, that
nullifies the claim that you are free to use it in *any way* you want.

  GPL is, in fact, rather restrictive. For example, if I make a project
under, let's say, the MIT license, I have to make extra sure that I don't
include *any* GPL'd code in it because that would be againt the GPL license.

  If I wanted to use the GPL'd code, I would have to change from the MIT
license to the GPL license, which is more restrictive.

  Just the fact that you can include MIT-licensed code in a GPL-licensed
program but not the other way around tells a lot about which license is
more "free".

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message