gjc@mitech.com (02/07/91)
Rms says: Is there a trend in Motif vs. Open Look? Just kidding, but I've been waiting for days for a message that would combine the two most common flame-lines on this list. All kidding aside, a point of information here, only the COPYRIGHT HOLDER has valid legal standing to sue over copyright violations. IMHO: Therefore commercial hardware and software vendors and especially software consultants will find the GNU copyright/license to be less of a problem than the many software packages found with copyright messages of the form "Free for everything but commercial use." The "Free for everything but commercial use" thing can be a real trap. What if a company hires a consultant to help them *obtain* and modify such software? Is that commercial use? It could very well be. But a consultant who works with FSF software, and the hardware or software company that provides such software to their customers does not run into such a problem. The "Free for everything but commercial use" copyright is like a new version of the AT&T "free" un*x license to universities of years ago, or the old Gosling Emacs license situation. If the software catches on, proves to be popular, or shows any sign of being of commercial value, then watch out! Obviously the MIT X-Window style copyright is the ideal. But I will take the FSF one over the "No commercial Use" kind in all cases. Does anybody disagree with that? -gjc