So to be clear by your license...

If I copy the Ubuntu CD sitting on my desk and file both copies in the trash bin at my feet ("make software from software") then all the proprietary software I have written for the past 15 years ("your software and source code") must be "distributed freely just like Ubuntu (this software) is"?

No thanks I like the GPL better. ; )

While I am being onery with the above, you must understand that the verbiage necessary for a legal document that translates for copyright issues across the globe can not be as simple as three or four sentence paragraph. I find the GPL to be rather eloquent and terse compared to many licenses.

-Derek

Jason Spatafore wrote:

On Sunday 12 June 2005 08:06, Alan Dayley wrote:

What are you laughing at?  I find the GPL one of the easiest to
understand licenses in the software industry.  Perhaps you'd like to
elaborate on your opinion?


The fluff. There's too much fluff. Let's simplify it:

"If you make software from this software, your software and source code must 
be distributed freely just like this software is. No exceptions and no 
restrictions."

Do you see how easy that is?

I would get into a long and drawn out discussion but I am the last person on 
earth to engage in a discussion regarding IP theft/protection. My opinion is 
simple: if you don't warranty and support the software you create, including 
the output it produces, you should have no right to IP protections nor should 
you be allowed to charge for use of your product. Period. No exceptions.