Re: [Fsfe-uk] Liberated software

[Andy Kilner]

On Wed, 2004-10-06 at 15:59, Chris Croughton wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 02:24:07PM +0100, Andy Kilner wrote:
> > "It is a requirement of various international conventions on copyright
> > that copyright should be automatic with no need to register."
> > http://www.intellectual-property.gov.uk/std/faq/copyright/auto_protection.htm
> > 
> > Software you write is borne into captivity. When you distribute it under
> > a copyleft license you liberate it.
> 
> Er, no, it is still copyright to me (or to the FSF if it's been assigned
> to them), and certain freedoms are still curtailed with the (L)GPL.  It
> is more liberated when I distribute it under a BSD-style or Zlib-style
> licence, but since my own software is 'born' under that licence (it's in
> my basic templates, so the licence is there before I ever write any
> actual code) it is no more 'liberated' when I distribute it under the
> same licence.

but until you distribute it, you can still change the headers and keep
it captive still. so it isn't free until you let it loose.

> It is only fully 'liberated' if I put it explicitly into the Public
> Domain, which I have done only rarely.

The old argument over which license is more free.

-andy
-- 
Andy Kilner <address@hidden>

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part