[openip] Re: GNU License for Hardware

Angelo Schneider angelo.schneider at xcc.de
Sun Oct 17 22:24:31 UTC 1999


please RMS, if you quote me and you draw conclusions, please
quote everything, than its easyer to correlate what I said and ment
in relation what you quoted.

Propably, (you remember 'free' verus 'for free/free beer') you are
not aware that many people on that lists are not native english speakers
as e.g. I.

Ok pleaese see below.

Richard Stallman wrote:
>     It forces you to release all your stuff which is in someway combined
>     with the GNU stuff as GPL, too.
>     Most people prefer 'free' software where the author states: "you can do
>     what
>     ever you want provided you leave this notice intact".
>     ...
>     In fact I prefer a community source licence, which enforces everyone,
>     who is earning money with my stuff, to fund me and allows every one, who
>     simply want to use it for non commercial purpose, to use it 'for free'.
> Please tell me if I understand you properly.  Here is what
> you seem to be saying.

Ok, to make it easy: no, you did not understand me properly.

> * You want to make your software non-free, with a license like Sun's
>   non-free license.  (That would mean we have to reject it.)

My softwae will be as free as yours but more free in one aspekt and less
in one other aspect:

a) you can get the source (thats what I consider free, the rest realy
does not interest me)
b) you can get it for free if you don't release your derived software
build on 
my work for money/if you are not payed for your software [less free]
c) you are not forced to make your derived work 'free' [more free]

> * You want US to release OUR software in a different way.


>   You want us to use non-copyleft lax licenses
>   which let you use our code in your non-free software.

Please see below: but yes I would like to use some stuff from your stuff
in a comemrcial 'product' payed per copy without to be forced to release
it imedialtly as open code and free code.

> * But you have no intention of letting us use your code
>   in our free software packages.

Sorry, thats my point why I would like to be quoted in total.
>From where did you draw that conclusion?
You are a free human and everybody on this list is a free human(alien?)
so why should I want YOU (capitalising your US) to change anything?
Where did you get the point that I do not let you use my stuff?
I simply would sombody, who uses my stuff, let think about that:
do you save money/effort in using it? Do you earn money in using it?
If yes why don't you think that it is fair to chare one percent of it

> It seems you want a system where you impose restrictions on everyone
> else, for your profit, while the rest of us bend over backwards to

Very strange conclusion....

> cater to you.  Surely you must be aware that that is quite
> asymmetrical.
> I use the GPL to insist that we have a fair relationship, at least as

Thats what I wanted to point out: the GPL does not let me use the
under the conditions I like, and I think that are many people out there
with the same feeling. Thats all, and thats not an offence.

> regards use of my code.  If you want to use my code, you have to let
> me use yours.  Fair is fair.

That will I do ... But not under the GPL :-) If you want to use my code
you will have to accept my open source licence, as far as I know the GNU
project, this would ever be enough, but you seem very ideologic on that,
so I'm afraid you will never use code from me :-(

>     I have not the finacial background to work years for free an than giving
>     away my software for free.
> (Free software does not mean you have to "give it away for free".
> Free software is a matter of freedom, not price.)

I know that. But how can I apply the GPL to release my software to be
payed on an per copy base?

> You're saying you cannot write free software because you are not rich.
> When I started the GNU Project, I was not rich.
> Most people who work on free software are not rich.
> If you don't know this is possible, ask some people and find out.

Asking this does not help. You need a teacher and an advisor or a

> If you really wish to write free software, try to find a way,

I want to write open source software. I want everybody who has a
benefit in using my software to contribute (to my organisation).

It's just like using a road, sombody builds it, and everybody who uses
pays for it. Why not having the same in software?

I prefer to get simply rich :-) and spending my money in doing good
with that. But as I tried to express: the GPL forces me to forget the
"I write a tool and you as a smith use it and you pay back in some
respect what you save in using my tool" schema.

If I dont have to work for money at all, I will still have projects in
mind which are quite to huge to be done during my livetime.

I want to finance them, so I have to get rich first, quite easy.

> and maybe you will succeed.  Even if you don't succeed completely,
> you may succeed partly.  If you live cheaply, as I did and still do,
> you ought to be able to make a living by working half-time or less

As a Programmer not, as a Consultant yes.

> as a programmer.  Even if that job involves making proprietary software,
> you could still write free software the other half of your time.
> Doing good for society with half of your work is better than doing
> no good at all.

You forgott one thing: some percentage of the guys on theese lists are 
europeans: a great majority of us did their civilian service for 15/18
or 24

Paying/contributing to society is something everybody does in our world


Angelo Schneider           OOAD/UML           Angelo.Schneider at xcc.de
Putlitzstr. 24         Patterns/FrameWorks       Fon: +49 721 9812465
76137 Karlsruhe             C++/JAVA             Fax: +49 721 9812467

More information about the License-discuss mailing list