"viral" (was RE: Licensing options for firmware)

[James W. Thompson, II]

Sorry, not an acquaintance of Ken Brown's.

What justification can there be to say that if you choose to extend an
application that you must license your work under the same terms as
the original app, shouldn't the author of code set its terms, not
someone else? The GPL restricts freedom in regards to derivative works
through this 'viral' nature and without solid justification, why? In
order to expand the GPL sandbox at the expense of author freedom. Sure
I can choose to not use and extend Free software but wouldn't it be
more profitable to simply accept extension under reasonable terms, or
heck, shouldn't the author of a modification be permitted to decide
the destiny of their code so long as he doesn't go against the desires
of the original author's code in regards to that original author's
work.

Just because no other 'resonable terms' at the time of authoring of
the GPL is merely a lack of foresight.


-James