Re: License Choice

> The problem with public domain is it allows code meant for free use to
> be encumbered by severe EULAs. The GPL explicitely states that use is
> not restricted. I'm not saying the license is perfect, only that it and
> the LGPL are the best choices if you want both users and developers to
> not be charged to use your work.

If an author wants to make his code/app available for anyone to use but
not sell, all he need do is write a licence that way.

With the MASM32 project code that I write myself, it affords the user
base the same rights as commercial development software where they can
use it in their own applications, make a profit using it and are under
NO OBLIGATION to publish the use and are not forced to publish their
own code.

What cannot be done with the code is for anyone to sell it or relicence
it under a different licencing system and this also prevents people
from code harvesting for commercial purposes.

I have made the criticism in the past that GPL is a Corporate
controlled code production method that benefits large Corporations like
IBM and SUN at the expense of the vast number of people who wrote it in
the first place for a free and open operating system.

I come down on the side of programmers against Corporations every time
and this is why I continue to support private ownership and control of
code over any notion whatsoever that a Corporation should control code
written by other people that have not been paid for their work.

Regards,

hutch at movsd dot com

.