Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

["Sebastian Günther" <samson@guenther-roetgen.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2577 bytes --]

* Joerg Schilling (Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de) [29.06.08 13:38]:
> Daniel Iliev <daniel.iliev@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> > So, mkisofs.c is the "Program" and cdrtools is a "work based on the
> > Program", right?
> 
> If you believe this and what you claimed later, then the GPL would be 
> a definitely non-free license. See the OpenSource definition at
> http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd
> 
> Unfortunately the GPL has not been written in an unambiguous way. This is
> why the OSI rated the GPL as non-free for several years. Some years ago, the
> FSF explained that the GPL needs to be interpreted in a way that makes it
> compliant to the rules at http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd
> 

And that is the bottom of the line in this whole elaborate discussion:
The definition of freedom.

I *like* the GPL because of that "You have all the freedom, exept to cut 
down this freedom"-attitude. It is like: I am a tolerant person, but not 
to intolerant people. And as another example: The german constitution 
also prohibits the change of the articles that guarantee human rights.

Other may find this as a restricting of their freedom, for me it is the 
only guarantee of the freedom. We are talking about licences, quite 
the same as laws. They define the last ressort, the line no one should 
be able to cross.

For the academic field a BSD-like licence is a very good choice, because 
one can publish it to a broad community, yet allow the moneygivers to 
use it in their commercial, closed product.

And if I wrote software, I would not want people to reuse the codeit in 
closed  source. So GPL is the right choice for me, because of the viral 
and supposed non-free issue.

But note:

This is *my* choice, and if somone wants to use another license, fine 
with me.

But remember, if more people contibute to a software project, then the 
license is some essential part of the collaboration. Changing it 
requires the consensus of *all* people who *ever* contributed to it.

So changing a license is always cumbersome.

These are general thoughts, not personally againt you,

> Jörg
> 

Now my critisism on your decision:
I regard the license change as weakening of freedom, reasons are 
hopefully clear from the above statements.

And yes I am radical:

I don't like the capitalism, and I found a little socialism in the GPL. 
And I will fight to protect it!

Sebastian

-- 
 " Religion ist das Opium des Volkes. "      Karl Marx

 SEB@STI@N GÜNTHER         mailto:samson@guenther-roetgen.de

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]