nemesis wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> nemesis wrote:
>>> What is more free?  Something that takes measures to always be free or
>>> something that is so free that even allows something to not be free
>>> anymore?
>> Something released under the MIT license is always free.
> 
> gcc evolution is guaranteed by requiring that all modifications and bug fixes
> are too released under the same GPL, thus, free.

That's incorrect, as you've repeatedly pointed out.

MIT licensed code is always free to do whatever you want with it. Whether 
that's a good thing or a bad thing is a different question. You're arguing 
that the GPL is "more free" than the MIT license, and this is just factually 
incorrect. It has more restrictions than software licensed with the MIT 
license and software released as GPL can be used for fewer purposes.

When I argue that the MIT license is more free and has fewer restrictions, 
it's not a counter-argument to point out that GPL leads to better code. Any 
more than arguing slavery is less free than sufferage is countered by the 
fact that cotton costs less if you have slaves to pick it.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message