greve@gnu.org said:
but I believe we should push the ideal that Linux can exist with diversity in software licensing: Some GPL, some BSD, some commercial and closed, and some between the two extremes.
So why do we even consider having a logo with the Gnu horns on it? I see a contradiction here.
Personally, I tend to agree with Georg and want to see the FSFE supporting all forms of free software licensing, however I would like to see the GNU world properly acknowledged for their great contribution as well.
There seem to be some more and some less radical positions on this mailing list with respect to the economical aspects of software, some even seem to want to go beyond the GPL and to restrict or prohibit commercial distribution of free software. I believe free software would best helped with a more liberal approach, more or less in the sense of supporting everything that could also be included in a Debian distribution.
- Josef
|| On Fri, 18 May 2001 11:12:52 +0200 || Josef Dalcolmo dalcolmo@vh-s.de wrote:
jd> greve@gnu.org said:
but I believe we should push the ideal that Linux can exist with diversity in software licensing: Some GPL, some BSD, some commercial and closed, and some between the two extremes.
There appears to have been a quoting mistake. I did not say this.
jd> So why do we even consider having a logo with the Gnu horns on jd> it? I see a contradiction here.
Personally I think we should *not* have a logo with the GNU motive in it. In my discussion with Anja I told her this, but of course she's entirely free to make any suggestion she feels like making.
jd> Personally, I tend to agree with Georg and want to see the FSFE jd> supporting all forms of free software licensing, however I would jd> like to see the GNU world properly acknowledged for their great jd> contribution as well.
The FSFE will (just like the FSF) continue promoting the GNU-Project and its licenses because we feel they are the best licenses available at the moment. We'll also be working on them to make sure they remain the best licenses available. :)
The GNU-Project is a project of the FSF(E) and not the other way round. The FSF always followed a broader approach and tried to do fundamental work on the philosophy, structure and idea of Free Software; I believe the FSFE should do the same.
Therefore we need to avoid narrowing down the FSF(E) to the GNU-Project by chosing a GNU motive for the logo.
jd> There seem to be some more and some less radical positions on jd> this mailing list with respect to the economical aspects of jd> software, some even seem to want to go beyond the GPL and to jd> restrict or prohibit commercial distribution of free software.
The funny thing is that if you restricted commercial use, a software would immediately become non-free, because you lose the freedom to use for any purpose and you'd lose the freedom to decide how, whether and under which conditions you share your software.
Each of them alone would be more than enough to violate the Free Software definition.
Regards, Georg
Georg C. F. Greve wrote:
|| On Fri, 18 May 2001 11:12:52 +0200 || Josef Dalcolmo dalcolmo@vh-s.de wrote:=20
jd> greve@gnu.org said:
but I believe we should push the ideal that Linux can exist with diversity in software licensing: Some GPL, some BSD, some commercial and closed, and some between the two extremes.
There appears to have been a quoting mistake. I did not say this.
This quote is from the kuro5hin article that you had simply pasted into your mail, so this quoting was formally correct. (I prefix included material in my mails with `: ' to avoid such confusion ...)
Frank
|| On Sat, 19 May 2001 00:29:12 +0200 || Frank Heckenbach frank@g-n-u.de wrote:
There appears to have been a quoting mistake. I did not say this.
fh> This quote is from the kuro5hin article that you had simply fh> pasted into your mail, so this quoting was formally correct. (I fh> prefix included material in my mails with `: ' to avoid such fh> confusion ...)
Well. I did prefix the subject with "K5: " but Josef changed the subject... .-)
Regards, Georg