using the PSF license for one's code

[Anton Vredegoor]

On 6 Nov 2002 07:32:46 -0800, donnal at donnal.net (Donnal Walter) wrote:

>For entities like PSF that distribute a lot of copies of their
>software, it probably makes sense to write their own specific
>licenses, but for everyone else (like me) it seems to boil down to
>choosing GPL or BSD. Who would have guessed that it could be this

To me it isn't that simple. From my perspective the GPL is using the
same kind of "weapons" to defend it's followers against the "evil"
closed sourcerers.

Using the same kind of weapons as the enemy risks becoming oneself
that what is feared. I think this is meant by "not resisting evil" and
"turning the other cheek" and such ideas as one can find in the old
books.

So the GPL is the enemies weapon turned around and used against the
enemy itself. Just read the legal language inside the document to
proove this.

The BSD is of a somewhat less radical nature in that it is trying to
defend the authors against users trying to legally attack them. It
could be described as a shield. But we know how murky "defense only"
arguments can get.

There also is the option of completely giving away all rights to the
code -placing it in the public domain- which can be compared to having
no defense at all, like "turning the other cheek". This is dangerous
too because although one can give code away, some legal attacks might
succeed in linking the code to the author again and even sue the
author because the users were not properly warned against possible
dangers arising out of using the code.

So to me the license one uses is an indication of what moral level one
is currently acting on. For me this means that although I see that it
is better to not resist evil I am still not wise enough to not step
aside if someone is hitting me, so that means it's BSD for me now, and
sometimes public domain if I am in a philosophical mood.

AV. 

1 Corintians 6:13