WAS: Printing OT:GPL licenses

[Walter Vaughan]

Jean-Pierre A. Radley wrote:

> I'd always thoought that the GPL *encouraged* distribution; in what way
> do you, Walter, find it preventing anything?

IANAL... :)

The only time I find open source limiting is working with hardcore Apache 2.0 
license developers. They *really* don't want to touch anything GPL[0] or HPL[1]. 
So if there is a library or module that has any sort of GPL license, they'll 
clean room it and re-invent the wheel, rather than incorporate it. The good 
thing with ASL 2.0 is that it does pretty much remove any cloud of patents, 
since you have to agree that you will and cannot cause patent liability with any 
contribution. You are not forbidden to include patented software in a GPL project.

BSD licensed projects have no problem with GPL pieces and parts, nor being used 
in closed source endeavors.

It's really like religion. They all may feel they are connected with $DIETY, but 
along that spectrum there are groups that feel they are better connected.

GPL says if you take my source code and make additions to it AND DISTRIBUTE it 
to a THIRD PARTY, you then have to make the new source code available.

How can that be limiting? Sounds like good karma to me :)

--
Walter
[0] man wikipedia
[1] excellent article describing the Honest Public License
http://www.funambol.com/blog/capo/2006/08/honest-public-license.html