Here’s a discussion between Richard Stallman and Bruno Haible forcing Haible’s code to change to a GPL license. It’s like reading something out of a geek version of The Godfather.
I’m a fan of truly free licenses such as the BSD license. A lot of developers don’t put too much thought into the affects of the GPL until it’s too late; since Linus did it, the GPL is good enough for me. The “lesser” GPL or LGPL is a far better license and virtually everything that currently is GPL should consider using the LGPL. The reason is that the LGPL allows one to link to a work without incurring the severe penalty of forcing my work to become licensed under the GPL. Freedom to me is about preserving my right to choose; the GPL removes any right if I want to benefit from anyone else’s GPL licensed work.
The funny thing to me is this: the folks who are really pro-GPL are often anti-DRM. To someone who doesn’t care about the ideological reasons for using the GPL or DRM the penalty is the same: conform or suffer the legal consequences. The GPL acts exactly the same as DRM in that the terms of the GPL restricts how I can use what is “free” to use. Similarly, if I’ve paid the $1.99 for an iTunes/Quicktime-compatible version of 30 Rock I want the right to extract a portion of it to use in a new work. Just as I do not get the right due to DRM I would not have the right to license a new work under a more free license such as the BSD license if I want to do what is good and not re-invent the wheel.
