fred.morcos at gmail.com
Tue Jun 19 20:26:47 UTC 2012
I don't see much fruit coming out of that conversation anymore.
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Anonymous Remailer (austria)
<mixmaster at remailer.privacy.at> wrote:
>> GPL protects the freedom of the programmer who licensed his
>> code under those licenses: He wants it to be free for use,
>> but not to be turned into closed source products.
> What a lying sonofabitch. That is not called freedom. That is called
> "forcible, viral open source". I think we can all see the difference. Open
> your motherfucking eyes, communist goofball...
>> A programmer who does not want to raise this barrier will
>> typically use the BSD license which is "more free".
> No, it's just plain "free."
>> BSDL in opposite is often criticized a "rape me license".
> No, it is not, except perhaps by lying atheist Marxist bastards and his
> religious adherents.
>> It explicitely (!) allows creating derivates in a closed
>> source manner. This means that parts of BSD licensed code
>> can be a key component in a proprietary closed source
>> product that is for sale (e. g. a firewall appliance),
>> and nobody will find out about that fact.
> Now you got it! GPL is about forcing people to do what /you/ want and BSD is
> about letting them do what /they/ want. Let's see if you can guess which one
> of those licenses is about freedom. Hint: freedom is not defined as forcing
> people to do what you want.
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
More information about the freebsd-questions