On 10/29/07, William Chops Westfield <westfw@mac.com> wrote:
>
> On Oct 28, 2007, at 5:10 PM, Neil Cherry wrote:
>
> > If you are the sole copyright holder on the code you can
> > release your code under as many licenses as you want.
>
> But I thought the idea of open source was to benefit from
> the massive amount of open source software; ie no application
> is likely to have ANY "sole copyright holder."

There are many contributors to OpenOffice but Sun wants
to be the sole copyright holder. There are many contributors
to GCC but FSF is the sole copyright holder.

> I'm starting to see similarities between open source advocates
> and the RIAA and similar organizations that they hold as ultimate
> evils; it's all about restricting the users from using the
> "intellectual property" in ways that the "owner" disapproves of.
> (you just have to decide whether an intermediate level "programmer"
> is a "user" or not.) (Hmm.  GPL == DRM?  Perhaps GPL3 will
> disallow itself!)

Oops, this will again be a bit too controversial.

Xiaofan
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist