Free Software Foundation Begins Rewriting the GPL

[dmcfarland]

I found this article off of slashdot.

http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/05/12/02/1331234.shtml?tid=156&tid=106

[Master of Reality]

hmm, i wonder if they will make it more... attractive... to those that cant use the GPL for their software because of restriction like KDE and such.

[dmcfarland]

I didnt get all of that article. I think the GPL licensing scheme is just fine. It starts out everyone on a level playing field and then lets them compete to make things better. Thats my impression of it.

[Master of Reality]

Im not really sure what if anything needs improvement, but it does restrict programs from using anything that isnt GPL (or maybe just open source). Like KDE using X. Thats not necessarily a bad thing though. Im really not an expert on the subject either

[Pathos]

I read an interview with richard stallman and generally its going to be tightened up. He was bitching about how google have modified apache servers or something and don't release the source because they don't have to unless they distribute the executable. But aparently there are holes in the current gpl when patents are involved.

In my mind the gpl was just there to let like minded programmers share code without people using it as their own to profit.

[Calum]

well, i think the GPL is fine, however so long as all of its principles are maintained, i don't see why the FSF shouldn't update it to reflect the effects of modern technology and legislation. software released under the existing licence needn't be "upgraded" to the new licence unless the maintainer/distributor wants to do it, surely.

[WMD]

I read an interview with richard stallman and generally its going to be tightened up. He was bitching about how google have modified apache servers or something and don't release the source because they don't have to unless they distribute the executable.

Apache isn't a GPL program, though.  RMS has no control over its license.