Kernel developers' position on GPLv3

Shane M. Coughlan shane at
Sat Sep 23 10:18:01 UTC 2006

Hash: SHA256

Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> What the `Open source' community thinks about a `Free software'
> license is not very important, their goals conflict with the Free
> software movement; they want a practical license, we want freedom.

While I understand the sentiment underlying your sentence, I would
suggest that Free Software licenses are practical.  One reason Free
Software is such a good idea is because it makes a great deal of sense
if we consider it with an open mind.

I believe Ben made a good point; the Linux kernel developers have done a
lot of good work to bring Free Software to more people.  Some of them do
this using the term 'open source' rather than Free Software.  Perhaps we
can generalise and say that some people referring to 'open source' are
worried that the term Free Software is too strong.

It's important to remember that we are all traveling along the same
road.  Rather than striking aggressive positions we should discuss
things in a civil way. Let's not bicker.

What the vast majority of us are doing is trying to ensure that really
amazing and really interesting technology can exist in a way that makes
it fair and accessible to everyone.

Ben suggested that we discuss why the new GPL license is a good idea.
Why don't we devote a little time to that?  Perhaps some people could
mention why they think the new license is a good idea.  Perhaps everyone
could go and visit and look at the on-going process.
Maybe people could blog about why they feel the GPLv3 will help ensure
Free Software remains Free Software.


Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)


More information about the Discussion mailing list