[ILUG] RMS: KDE in violation of GPL

[Smelly Pooh]

In reply to kevin lyda's flatulent wordings, 
 
> well, while it's less serious, i see the same scenario between bsd and the
> gpl.  with a bsd license someone can take my code and make it so i can't
> read it.  i still get credit, but i can't see it.  with the gpl people
> can *choose* to take my code but they can't hide it.

Just because somebody takes your code and does something with it that you
can't see what they've done, doesn't mean you automatically can't see the code
that you wrote yourself.  It in no way takes from your own program.  If you
were really writing code to make it as useful to as many people as possible
you'd release it under a non GPL free license, if you wanted to "force" people
to be open source you'd use GPL, personally I'd prefer the former and applaud
the likes of Apache and BSD who chose that route, actually I presume QT is
LGPL and not GPL (isn't that standard for GPLed libraries so that apps written
using the library do not have to be GPLed also?).

> different people have different values.  heck, i even love watching
> james bond flicks.  but i'm not going to join...  er...  the secret
> shamrocks?  ie5?  o'cia?  well, i won't be getting a security clearance
> (particularly if They see this message) and i won't release any serious
> code under the bsd license.  gpl: the license preferred by code flashers.

Funny, I downright refuse to release any code under the GPL full stop.