Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

Alexandre Oliva aoliva at redhat.com
Sun Jul 20 08:24:21 UTC 2008

On Jul 19, 2008, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote:

> Please explain how a work containing any GPL'd material can contain
> any that is not covered by the GPL, given the 'work as a whole'
> provision in the license.   While there are indeed licenses that
> permit their own terms to be replaced by the GPL when used in this
> way, that means the terms _become_ the GPL, not that different terms
> are or can be, by design, compatible.

Not quite.  A license such as your beloved modified BSD license does
not permit relicensing.  What makes it compatible with the GPL is that
it grants all the permissions granted by the GPL, and it doesn't
establish any requirements that are not present in the GPL.

>> You seem to really have a beef with copyleft and that is fine.

> I have a beef with representing restrictions as freedom.

You seem to not understand the difference between freedom and power,
and insist in demanding power when what you deserve and have is

Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
FSFLA Board Member       ¡Sé Libre! => http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}

More information about the fedora-list mailing list