From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EF547EE51 for ; Thu, 23 May 2013 23:39:22 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of eposse@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=209.85.219.52; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="eposse@gmail.com"; x-sender="eposse@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of eposse@gmail.com designates 209.85.219.52 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.219.52; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="eposse@gmail.com"; x-sender="eposse@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail-oa0-f52.google.com) identity=helo; client-ip=209.85.219.52; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="eposse@gmail.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail-oa0-f52.google.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4CAAOJnlHRVds0lGdsb2JhbABZgziwD4lmiDqBBAgWDgEBAQEHCwsJEiqCIwEBBAFAASUICwEDAQsBBQUEBxohIhIBBQEKEgYTCAqHaQMJBgycNI88hQEnAwqIRAEFDI8Ng18DlzuBKY4yFimBXYJ0IA X-IPAS-Result: Av4CAAOJnlHRVds0lGdsb2JhbABZgziwD4lmiDqBBAgWDgEBAQEHCwsJEiqCIwEBBAFAASUICwEDAQsBBQUEBxohIhIBBQEKEgYTCAqHaQMJBgycNI88hQEnAwqIRAEFDI8Ng18DlzuBKY4yFimBXYJ0IA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,730,1363129200"; d="scan'208";a="15502073" Received: from mail-oa0-f52.google.com ([209.85.219.52]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 23 May 2013 23:39:21 +0200 Received: by mail-oa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id h1so5149810oag.39 for ; Thu, 23 May 2013 14:39:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=pJIQntCyflhI2rLcqZL/FUxJ5KlLcJsSN0H4c/wLqB4=; b=Oz2Fq7X5Fwd/lcOTm1GEatzkzOFyX0Fm6PbFq6Emf9fTDsh/MN6xeXmJOcUXoh0mWh S2JBK1cxXl2tBpJeH49I2kYV7tvaLQlJ/sT6p8XeHBr3/o0wsKSH7epYubnqJSrQ205y 5tQ6+AGSDlMjqyGMY80IkmEGVoSkD3GcR4g/b5YkDwn7OMF5J04nKhc4KGWDBNATrkCg QkoOucdnFxay5Iw1T+mCXU5upXVMfvPAGdEUrUXAcyRrPJmLgc/MwQRq6OGxNbqk2eSC lS8vtyJ1JKgzfQfQNUrCWEj0HQZgJHv9amP2UvAnR8YINf2OSfpnXap32GwMuQs7c8iS r0Xg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.84.102 with SMTP id x6mr10020474oey.73.1369345159879; Thu, 23 May 2013 14:39:19 -0700 (PDT) Sender: eposse@gmail.com Received: by 10.182.186.101 with HTTP; Thu, 23 May 2013 14:39:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20130522123427.GA1894@siouxsie> <519CC1C8.3060502@etorok.net> <20130522171907.GA6073@notk.org> <519DB8D2.5080102@glondu.net> Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 17:39:19 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: TOcTA0H-EhrZ5dY2L72_72Q5YGE Message-ID: From: Ernesto Posse To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Daniel_B=FCnzli?= Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?St=E9phane_Glondu?= , caml-list Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0111d9cad46af304dd6983e9 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Licenses - Confusion --089e0111d9cad46af304dd6983e9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 4:41 AM, Daniel B=FCnzli wrote: > Le jeudi, 23 mai 2013 =E0 07:36, St=E9phane Glondu a =E9crit : > > I would say BSD-style licenses cater for the needs of organizations, and > > GPL-style ones cater for individuals. > > > Well as everyone seems to know and speak for the others, here's my take. > > Regardless of copyleft -- which I'm certain could be expressed in a > BSD-like concise way -- I would personally say that BSD-style licenses are > for humans and GPL-style for lawyers. > > If you need a lawyer to understand your freedom you are not free anymore. > Stop feeding the lawyers and the bureaucrats. > > I'm afraid this is a little bit too naive. I am not a lawyer, and I agree that the GPL is quite unreadable, but the choice of licence does matter, and has real consequences. A BSD or MIT licence is very permissive, but one could argue that they is too permissive, with no attribution required for example. If what you want is "anyone can use it in any way and I don't care", then BSD-like is fine. GPL, imposes restrictions on derivative works, which could be argued as limiting freedom. My point is, not all "copyleft" licences are the same, and the choice depends on your needs and how you want people to use your software. Personally I like Apache. I find it much more readable than GPL and without the same derivative works restrictions. > Best, > > Daniel > > > > -- > Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: > https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list > Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners > Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs > --=20 Ernesto Posse Modelling and Analysis in Software Engineering School of Computing Queen's University - Kingston, Ontario, Canada --089e0111d9cad46af304dd6983e9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 4:41 AM, Daniel B=FCnzli <daniel.buenzli= @erratique.ch> wrote:
Le jeudi, 23 mai 2013 =E0 07:36, St=E9phane = Glondu a =E9crit :
> I would say BSD-style licenses cater for the needs o= f organizations, and
> GPL-style ones cater for individuals.


Well as everyone seems to know and speak for the others, here's m= y take.

Regardless of copyleft -- which I'm certain could be expressed in a BSD= -like concise way -- I would personally say that BSD-style licenses are for= humans and GPL-style for lawyers.

If you need a lawyer to understand your freedom you are not free anymore. S= top feeding the lawyers and the bureaucrats.


I'm afraid this is a little = bit too naive. I am not a lawyer, and I agree that the GPL is quite unreada= ble, but the choice of licence does matter, and has real consequences. A BS= D or MIT licence is very=A0permissive, but one could argue that they is too= permissive, with no attribution required for example. If what you want is = "anyone can use it in any way and I don't care", then BSD-lik= e is fine. GPL, imposes restrictions on derivative works, which could be ar= gued as limiting freedom. My point is, not all "copyleft" licence= s are the same, and the choice depends on your needs and how you want peopl= e to use your software. Personally I like Apache. I find it much more reada= ble than GPL and without the same derivative works restrictions.=A0


=A0
Best,

Daniel



--
Caml-list mailing list. =A0Subscription management and archives:
ht= tps://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs



--
= Ernesto Posse

Modelling and Analysis in Software Engineering
Scho= ol of Computing
Queen's University - Kingston, Ontario, Canada
--089e0111d9cad46af304dd6983e9--