Re: gEDA-user: GPL-v3 for Open CAD

[Steven Michalske <smichalske@xxxxxxxxx>]

To make this point clear to get companies like IBM to support GPL V3
they had to put in clauses that excepted them from the IP rules.

Also see this clause
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#Compatibility_and_multi-licensing

you cant link a GPL v3 library into non GPL v3 work.... this is bull.

I am a stonch proponent of open software, but when the licence makes
inroads to invalidate the authors rights that are not part of the
software they developed....  It's going tooo far.

I support licenses like BSD, Apachee, Apple open software, GPL V2 and
MIT, and other permissive licenses.




If you want to licence something as GPL v3 you need do a dual release
with a closed license like QT is dual licensed.  Cause frankly no sane
business with any IP should develop GPL V3 code.

Steve


On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 6:33 AM, Armin Faltl <armin.faltl@xxxxxx> wrote:
> John Griessen wrote:
>>
>> al davis wrote:
>>>
>>> On Friday 13 August 2010, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
>>>>
>>>> can you give an example, please?
>>>
>>>
>>> Under GPL-3 you can't make a contribution that applies one of your own
>>> patents, then sue the users of the package for patent infringement.
>>
>> Sounds OK for openness so far.  What else?
>>
> yup, that's not so bad - what I find bad is, that he's trying to force GPL
> on all
> the libs, he thinks he's got the power to do. gnu libc he thinks is not a
> candidate,
> since there are too many other libc's.
>
> I'm happy with this, from the moment on, RFS pays all my bills and of course
> all
> the bills I might have, from that moment on ;-)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> geda-user mailing list
> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
>


_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user