Java problem

Marko Vojinovic vvmarko at panet.co.yu
Mon Dec 31 19:34:20 UTC 2007


On Monday 31 December 2007 17:24, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Alan Cox wrote:
> >> Sorry, I just don't understand the concept of _wanting_ to prevent the
> >> distribution of improved versions of code and keeping others from having
> >> it, while at the same time claiming it is free.
> >
> > Its really very simple. The GPL requires you provide any contributions
> > under a licence that makes them free.
>
> You mean restricted, don't you?

Freedom implies responsibility, if it is not to turn into chaos. GPL 
restrictions are there to enforce that derived code be free in a responsible 
way.

Absolute freedom (ie. freedom without responsibility) is a Bad Thing. Just 
imagine that you write a piece of code from scratch, and release it on the 
web without *any* licence. It would be absolutely free. It would be so free, 
in fact, that nothing could prevent me from downloading it and claiming my 
own copyright or patent that forbids you to release it. While this is 
unethical, if you give me complete freedom, it is legal.

So the GPL licence is a way to balance restrictions vs. freedom in a way that 
ensures that the author is responsible (in an ethical sense) and prevents his 
code from being hijacked by a third party. You may question if this is 
well-balanced, but I believe that the "best" answer does not exist. And GPL 
does the job somehow. Maybe not without side-effects, but I cannot think of a 
way to remove all possible side-effects of any potential license that you 
might call "better".

Btw, I am not a pro on legal stuff, this is just my intuitive view of things.

:-)
Marko

Marko Vojinovic
Institute of Physics
University of Belgrade
======================
e-mail: vmarko at phy.bg.ac.yu




More information about the fedora-list mailing list