"somebody" <x### [at] ycom> wrote:
> "Nicolas Alvarez" <nic### [at] gmailcom> wrote in message
> news:497fd2c3@news.povray.org...
>
> > http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/01/27/223230
> >
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GCC_Plugins
>
> > What?!? That's similar to what TiVo did, which made the FSF come up with a
> > whole new GPL version. And now they want to use the same kind of strategy
> > to make sure plugins are GPL??
>
> Why is it surprising, duplicituous or outrageous that software authors want
> to enforce their licenses, be it commercial or free and/or open source? FSF
> is not an anti-license organization, it just promotes a different kind of
> license than commercial.

Yes, the GPL is fully copyright-based.  It's not public domain and you own the
rights to your contribution throughout.  It's just that through that license
you promote and allow your licensed work to be used and modified by others, as
long as they don't try to pull a smarty and deny others that same right.

Post a reply to this message