gEDA-user: Re: licensing (GPL or otherwise) for hardware?

[Stephen Williams <steve@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Michael Sokolov wrote:

> On some rare occasions a paid client will have me develop some piece of
> software or firmware that would actually have value to humanity.  On
> those rare occasions I always ensure that the work gets open-sourced,
> if necessary without the client's knowledge.  Other times I use my
> clients' ignorance of the precise terms of the GPL and other free
> software licenses and make them believe that they have to open-source
> the kernel module I wrote for example, even if they really don't have
> to.

Remind me, if the opportunity ever arises, that I should not hire
you for anything.

We are about open source here, and *not* *theft*.

For that matter, I'm not so sure I want you use any of my software,
open source or not. If you don't feel bound to a contract you might
sign with a client, what is there to convince me you'll feel yourself
bound to the GPL or any other license I grant you without a signature.
You're really willing to knowingly lie to a paying customer?

GPL is not disrespect for intellectual property rights. Indeed it
relies on intellectual property rights to protect the author(s)
from misrepresentation, and, frankly, from theft.

-- 
Steve Williams                "The woods are lovely, dark and deep.
steve at icarus.com           But I have promises to keep,
http://www.icarus.com         and lines to code before I sleep,
http://www.picturel.com       And lines to code before I sleep."


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