Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Les Mikesell]

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:

>>>> But you must give up your freedom and rights or you are unable to
>>>> participate in distributing these things as part of a work that
>>>> contains any GPL-covered material.
>>> The "or" denounces your syllogism.  The "must" is inappropriate when
>>> there's an alternative.
>> The alternative is not sharing any GPL-encumbered code at all.  Do you  
>> consider that a reasonable alternative?
> 
> People have been sharing and modifying software licensed with the GNU GPL
> for ages, isn't that alternative somewhat imaginary?

No, very few people I know other than myself even know GPL software 
exists.  And the restrictions are largely responsible for keeping it 
that way for those ages.

> You seem to consider "sharing" proprietary software is sharing. I think
> that's wrong since to me it is not sharing but, instead, gaining control.

No, I think proprietary software is reasonable, but BSD, MIT, MPL, CDDL, 
  Apache, and similar less restricted licenses are about sharing.  GPL 
is about taking away other people's choices.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com