Hacker News Reader

Comment by quadrangle | Hacker News Reader

your opinion is based on misunderstanding. The GPL says one thing: no restricting others.

You can say, "that takes away my freedom to restrict others" but that's like saying, "your law takes away my freedom to have slaves"

The GPL doesn't remove freedom except in one way, which is an unintended side-effect: incompatibility.

What the GPL actively restricts is POWER. What you want that the GPL blocks is not freedom, it's power.

View on HN

  > "your law takes away my freedom to have slaves"

This does not work that way in software. More permissible licenses allow me to do whatever I want with my copy of the code. The original codes is still here, I cannot take it away.

I thought that the GPL restricted your redistribution of the code, as far as I know it still lets you do whatever you want with your own copy of the code.

Depends on whether you consider redistribution under a different license a part of "whatever you want".

What you do with your own copy, may that be adding to it, removing parts, or giving your one copy to someone else is generally not considered redistribution.

Only the creation of more copies which are then distrusted out are considered as redistribution, and to be covered by copyright.

The GPL says nothing at all about what YOU can do with YOUR copy. It says that you can't enslave OTHERS by limiting what THEY do with THEIR copies.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com