Revising the GPL

Exstatica writes "Finally, an update to that slightly outdated GPL (General Public License). This story discusses a few changes that the new GPL will include. Will the new GPL draw users to it, rather then using other licenses such as Apache's License or the Netscape Public License?"

Comments

Re:The GPL should be a little friendler.

[Chris Burke]

I would like to be able to use pattened by me technology in my Open Source Program but I don't want just everyone to use it, I don't mind if everyone sees it or alters it a bit but I don't want it to become part of MS Office without me getting some Bucks for it.

First, fuck you* for wanting to patent math. That's what software is: Iterative math.

Second, I don't think the intent is that MS would be able to use your patent in Office without releasing Office under the GPL -- which would be fine if they did, right? The article wasn't specific, but surely the FS lawyers involved in creating Version 3 will only want the grant of patent rights to be for the purposes of the GPL software.

Patents are fundamentally a monopoly on an idea. GPL is about releasing an idea into the commons. You pretty much can only pick one or the other.

* don't get offended; as Lewis Black once said regarding New Yorkers "'fuck' isn't a word, it's a comma". If you're still offended, well, fuck you. :)