Mandrake and the commercial license

Bernhard Reiter bernhard at
Tue Dec 17 17:58:10 UTC 2002

On Tue, Dec 17, 2002 at 06:45:01PM +0100, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 18:10, Guillaume Ponce wrote:
> > In fact, there is a difference: with this free *and copyleft* /
> > proprietary dual licencing you have to pay to have the power to deny
> > other people de freedoms you received.  With a non-copyleft free
> > software licence, it's gratis to do so.
> > 
> > I don't like the idea of reducing freedom.  And I don't like the idea
> > of paying to have the power to do so...
> It's wrong to say that they are reducing freedom.

You pay them to get a freedom reduced license...
I would only pay to get more freedom. :)

If you feel the need to geet this incorporate into non-free software,
why shouldn't everybody have this capability? In not choosing
a less freedom protecting license, like the GNU LGPL or an XFree86
style license, you are holding back that freedom. 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the Discussion mailing list