You may license your program in any way you want, this is at your option. I didn't say non-GPL programmers are capitalists, but the way the proprietary software is beeing developed is a part of the capitalistic society. I think that the new license is that you were seeking for.
However, there are some people who do not want to use the word "MY* or "YOURS" so often. Don't forget that we use a lot of GPL software that it was made by them. Shouldn't we give something for return by giving our programs in GPL? I mean, did you ever contributed to FSF? Why not? You do use GPL products, such as linux, which were made spending many many many hours of work. Why you do not feel the need to give back?
Free software helped a lot the programmers by giving away many powerful tools or libraries. Also developing in GPL means that other people help you to develop your program. Linus admits that he has written about the 5~10% of Linux. Why it would be right to sell it?
Moreover, the GPL license was made to keep the information free, not to prevent you from paying.
All of us we have bills to pay. By using GPL soft- ware we do not have programs to pay. I mean, if I should pay for linux, gnome, gimp, and other software I use, I would have gave many thousand dollars. I DIDN'T PAY FOR OBTAINING THE PROGRAMS I USE. Why not give back the 0.01% of their value by making my programs free? Can't you see that "common ownership" helps all of us?
no, GPL promotes common ownership for software, in contrast with communism which promotes common ownership generally. As result free software is only a subset of communism, which means that a free software programmer does *NOT* need to be a communist. If you generally, as a pure and "politically correct" American hate the idea of sharing and common ownership, stay with Microsoft, which follows all capitalism standards.
Slashdot Mirror
You may license your program in any way
you want, this is at your option.
I didn't say non-GPL programmers are
capitalists, but the way the proprietary
software is beeing developed is a part
of the capitalistic society.
I think that the new license is that you
were seeking for.
However, there are some people who do not
want to use the word "MY* or "YOURS" so
often. Don't forget that we use a lot of
GPL software that it was made by them.
Shouldn't we give something for return by
giving our programs in GPL?
I mean, did you ever contributed to FSF?
Why not? You do use GPL products, such
as linux, which were made spending many
many many hours of work. Why you do not
feel the need to give back?
Free software helped a lot the programmers
by giving away many powerful tools or libraries.
Also developing in GPL means that other people
help you to develop your program. Linus admits
that he has written about the 5~10% of Linux.
Why it would be right to sell it?
Moreover, the GPL license was made to keep
the information free, not to prevent you
from paying.
All of us we have bills to pay. By using GPL soft-
ware we do not have programs to pay. I mean, if
I should pay for linux, gnome, gimp, and other
software I use, I would have gave many thousand
dollars. I DIDN'T PAY FOR OBTAINING THE
PROGRAMS I USE. Why not give back the 0.01% of their value by making my programs free?
Can't you see that "common ownership"
helps all of us?
no, GPL promotes common ownership for software,
in contrast with communism which promotes
common ownership generally. As result free
software is only a subset of communism, which
means that a free software programmer does *NOT*
need to be a communist.
If you generally, as a pure and "politically
correct" American hate the idea of sharing and
common ownership, stay with Microsoft, which
follows all capitalism standards.
sorry for my poor english, I am NOT an American.