[License-discuss] Open Source Eventually License Development
lrosen at rosenlaw.com
Wed Aug 14 22:08:04 UTC 2013
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."
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
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
Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software.
Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call.
More information about the License-discuss