occupygpl.org wants to make copyleft licenses go away

37 respostas [Última entrada]
t3g
t3g
Desconectado
Joined: 05/15/2011

http://www.occupygpl.org

Just saw this on the /freesoftware Reddit. Not sure if a joke or not.

quantumgravity
Desconectado
Joined: 04/22/2013

Why care about people who don't understand a thing or don't want to understand?
i could just as well read the google company manifesto or something like that...

Just because you're not allowed to use code by some developer and close it up doesn't mean that this developer has suddenly power over you / is controlling your life.
Hence your freedom has *not* been taken away, period.
It just means that this piece of software won't help you to gain unethical control over other people.

quantumgravity
Desconectado
Joined: 04/22/2013

And please don't downvote t3g's post just because you disagree with his link.
The voting feature is not supposed to be used like that.

t3g
t3g
Desconectado
Joined: 05/15/2011

Thanks. I wanted to start a conversation on here just in case you may or may have missed this information earlier.

JadedCtrl
Desconectado
Joined: 08/11/2014

Hm. Let's all take a quick look at the https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/x.html (X Window System Trap.)
This "Occupy GPL" thing pretty much goes by the "Let's save the village by burning it" strategy...

onpon4
Desconectado
Joined: 05/30/2012

This website does not deserve any attention. Moreover, the fact that it tries to compare itself to Occupy Wall Street is insulting. It's rather more like the Tea Party.

I've heard an anecdote suggesting that companies find it funny that they can take permissively licensed software, use it to enhance their proprietary software, and give nothing back. I don't know whether or not this is true, but even if it isn't, it's exactly the sort of thing permissive licenses invite. All this crap about copyleft being some sort of injustice because corporations don't have the "freedom" to take away the freedom of their users? It strikes me the same as when the ultra-rich complain about not having "freedom" to exploit workers, the environment, the economy, etc to make themselves even richer.

lloydsmart

I am a member!

Desconectado
Joined: 12/22/2012

Thank you for precisely articulating what I've always felt about permissive licenses but couldn't quite put into words!

danieru
Desconectado
Joined: 01/06/2013

If I were a developer I would prefer a copy-left license, that way I can sell exceptions and at least get paid if I'm going to help non-free software development.

Casey Parker
Desconectado
Joined: 02/05/2015

The problem with Copyleft is that it encourages things like FreeBSD vs. Mac
OSX. The only reason OSX works out of the box and FreeBSD is no better for
it, is that Apple keeps the useful bits to themselves. It defeats the
opensource purpose.

On Wed Feb 11 2015 at 6:04:48 PM <name at domain> wrote:

> If I were a developer would prefer a copy-left license, this way I can sell
> exceptions and at least get paid if I'm going to help non-free software
> development.
>

JadedCtrl
Desconectado
Joined: 08/11/2014

Um, you're talking about permissive licensing. Copyleft would require Apple to release the useful bits, permissive would not require Apple to.

lembas
Desconectado
Joined: 05/13/2010

Permissive licenses are closer to open source thinking, neither cares too much about freedom.

t3g
t3g
Desconectado
Joined: 05/15/2011

I have a feeling Microsoft is going to do the same thing with the .NET Foundation where they release some of the source code in the spirit of loving open source, but their important code to make it all work as a complete package is hidden. That way, a "community" can improve their code for them and in return, they take that code and make their non-free software better.

At the same time, Microsoft is praised for being open and progressive for embracing open source and loving Linux but their ulterior motives are to lock developers into the C# ecosystem on Linux like they do with Windows and be reliant on their non-free tools.

I have no need to use C# as I find Python a gorgeous language that is stable and has the backing of a non-profit.

JadedCtrl
Desconectado
Joined: 08/11/2014

The .net Microsoft recently released isn't even open-source by the OSI's standards. It's not permissive, it's not copyleft, it's bs.

t3g
t3g
Desconectado
Joined: 05/15/2011

Microsoft is releasing the code under the MIT license, which is about as permissive as it gets. Some examples:

https://github.com/dotnet/core/blob/master/LICENSE
https://github.com/dotnet/corefx/blob/master/LICENSE

And this one is Apache 2.0:
https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/blob/master/License.txt

JadedCtrl
Desconectado
Joined: 08/11/2014

They're releasing it under the MIT license? I must've read a bad article or something. Sorry about that!

quantumgravity
Desconectado
Joined: 04/22/2013

I agree with everything except python being a stable language.
No matter which python program i ever used on no matter what system, it was always slow, buggy and crashed in the end.
Maybe it's because there are more hobby-python programs out there? I don't know.

As a programming language, i don't like how it's so distant to the actual things going on, like memory management and stuff.
I like C++ a lot more, even if it's more difficult to learn.

onpon4
Desconectado
Joined: 05/30/2012

If a Python program suddenly ends, that's because an exception was raised. It's not a problem with the Python interpreter, just a bug in the program (and a lot easier to solve than a segfault, since you have a proper error message).

You're wrong to generalize that all Python programs are excessively buggy; take a closer look at your system, there are probably more Python programs you use every day than you realize. Just try "aptitude -s remove python2.7", for example. All of those programs that would be removed along with Python 2.7 are at least partially written in Python (and probably some of them are entirely written in Python).

t3g
t3g
Desconectado
Joined: 05/15/2011

You're full of it. Python as a language and CPython as the interpreter are very stable.

Calinou
Desconectado
Joined: 03/08/2014

C# and Python are probably very different languages (one is medium-level, one is high-level).

davidnotcoulthard (non verificado)
davidnotcoulthard

On a slightly positive note about the site (credit where it's due, they say?), it looks way better than FSF's in my opinion!

pogiako12345
Desconectado
Joined: 07/11/2014

Free Software permits people to do what ever they want with their software right?

tomlukeywood
Desconectado
Joined: 12/05/2014

yes
it gives power to everyone and not one person or one company

the GPL is simply put

your free to do whatever you want with this program but on condition you do the same for everyone else

that’s what copyleft is it makes sure its always free/libre

Jozape
Desconectado
Joined: 02/28/2014

Not necessarily. Copyleft licensed software places restrictions on the user, but the placed restrictions prevent the user's liberties from being lost in distributed derivatives.

Calinou
Desconectado
Joined: 03/08/2014

Using copylefted software doesn't require doing anything, only distributing it, and in some cases, modifying it.

https://gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html

Jozape
Desconectado
Joined: 02/28/2014

From the narrow perspective of using = running, agreed.

Adrian Malacoda

I am a member!

Desconectado
Joined: 12/26/2010

That is usually how someone "uses" a program, yes. I'm aware that people sometimes broaden "use" to mean distributing or incorporating something into another program, but from a legal perspective, a user is someone who runs a program. In this manner, free software licenses do not restrict use in the slightest (and they cannot, or else they do not meet the Free Software Definition). Copyleft only kicks in when the program is distributed, which is something else entirely.

Jozape
Desconectado
Joined: 02/28/2014

The legal perspective is good to know. I personally would consider any person distributing Trisquel for any purpose to be using the software(to raise awareness for example), which is why I wrote user.

doolio
Desconectado
Joined: 12/31/2013
SuperTramp83

I am a translator!

Desconectado
Joined: 10/31/2014

i'm sure it is a joke

Legimet
Desconectado
Joined: 12/10/2013

Strange, now that webpage redirects to Github's choosealicense.com.

t3g
t3g
Desconectado
Joined: 05/15/2011

Makes you wonder if it was created by a GitHub employee or now just redirects for a joke. The layout of the site did look like they put some effort into it though.

Jabjabs
Desconectado
Joined: 07/05/2014

Yeah I was too late, it has been doing that for a day now.

Jodiendo
Desconectado
Joined: 01/09/2013

Sorry, but this article should had been post-it in the TROLL HOLE and not in the main forum of Trisquel.

muhammed
Desconectado
Joined: 04/13/2013

I disagree

JadedCtrl
Desconectado
Joined: 08/11/2014

If you were late, Archive.org has a copy of the old page.
https://web.archive.org/web/20150210203941/http://www.occupygpl.org/

Casey Parker
Desconectado
Joined: 02/05/2015

Did you go insane?

On Sun Feb 15 2015 at 10:34:48 AM <name at domain> wrote:

> The GPL is not a free license. It does not grant freedom, it grants
> different
> restrictions.
> The GPL is not a free license. It does not grant freedom, it grants
> different
> restrictions.
> The GPL is not a free license. It does not grant freedom, it grants
> different
> restrictions.
> The GPL is not a free license. It does not grant freedom, it grants
> different
> restrictions.
> The GPL is not a free license. It does not grant freedom, it grants
> different
> restrictions.
>

tomlukeywood
Desconectado
Joined: 12/05/2014

is this trolling or is this your opinion?
if it is

can you not see that by stopping developers harming
people’s freedom
everyone is free and that they must respect others
freedom to keep it this way