From: Alexander Terekhov (terekhov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-11-29 09:37:42
Mathias Gaunard wrote:
> Martin Schulz wrote:
> > If you want to release your code a open source but reserve commercial
> > uses to your own, you may choose the GPL
> The GPL perfectly allows commercial use. It's just that it may not be
Not so according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Easterbrook
("Frank Hoover Easterbrook (born 1948) is Chief Judge of the United
States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. He has been Chief Judge
since November 2006, and has been a judge on the court since 1985.
Easterbrook is noted for his use of economic analysis of law, his
legalist approach to judicial interpretation, for his clear writing
style, and for being one of the most prolific judges of his generation.
Easterbrook is one of the most prolific and most cited appellate judges
"Authors who distribute their works under this license, devised by the
Free Software Foundation, Inc., authorize not only copying but also the
creation of derivative works--and the license prohibits charging for the
derivative work. People may make and distribute derivative works if and
only if they come under the same license terms as the original work.
Thus the GPL propagates from user to user and revision to revision:
neither the original author, nor any creator of a revised or improved
version, may charge for the software or allow any successor to charge.
Copyright law, usually the basis of limiting reproduction in order to
collect a fee, ensures that open-source software remains free: any
attempt to sell a derivative work will violate the copyright laws, even
if the improver has not accepted the GPL. The Free Software Foundation
calls the result ``copyleft.''"
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk