On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Byron Jeff wrote: >> > Freedom 0 is the freedom to use the software for any purpose. >> >> But the GPL doesn't give you that freedom without additional restrictions. > > It does. As pointed out earlier in the thread, the GPL only deals with > modification and redistribution of software. It can be used for any > purpose. > ****************************************************** >From http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/quick-guide-gplv3.html: Nobody should be restricted by the software they use. There are four freedoms that every user should have: the freedom to use the software for any purpose, the freedom to share the software with your friends and neighbors, the freedom to change the software to suit your needs, and the freedom to share the changes you make. When a program offers users all of these freedoms, we call it free software. ****************************************************** To me GPL itself does not meet the 3rd condtion. BSD and Modified BSD does. So personally I like Modified BSD license better than GPL. On the other hand, from FSF's point of view, the agenda is more important than the above "freedom". And imposing limit of the modification and redistribution does help on its agenda. On this perspective, it is more suitable for FSF. In the end, it is perfectly right for the owner of the software to use any license they see fit. So it is perfectly ok for FSF to use GPL on the software that it oversees. Olin's license on his software is very good and I think it is Open Source (kind of modified BSD). Olin's licnse on his USBprog firmware and USB host driver is more restrictive than his other software. But it is still perfectly ok and reasonable to me. Xiaofan -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist