[License-discuss] Open Source Eventually License Development

[Lawrence Rosen]

Richard Stallman wrote:
> I considered it a problematical compromise.  At least it gave us free
software after a year.

Precisely my point: "FOSS is better late than never."

/Larry



-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Stallman [mailto:rms at gnu.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 2:24 PM
To: lrosen at rosenlaw.com
Cc: license-discuss at opensource.org; monty at askmonty.org; karen at gnome.org;
mark.atwood at hp.com; moglen at softwarefreedom.org; nathan at gonzalezmosier.com;
rc at gonzalezmosier.com; lrosen at rosenlaw.com
Subject: Re: [License-discuss] Open Source Eventually License Development

        [ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider
        [ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,
        [ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example.

    I actually like the Ghostscript/Aladdin license, which was essentially
    GPL-after-one-year. I was their attorney at the time and I fully
supported
    their business and licensing model. (For what it is worth, so did my
    client's friend, Richard Stallman, who apparently considered this a
    reasonable way then to end up with GPL software.)

That is not quite accurate.  I considered it a problematical compromise.  At
least it gave us free software after a year.

--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation
51 Franklin St
Boston MA 02110
USA
www.fsf.org  www.gnu.org
Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software.
  Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call.