Quote:
Originally Posted by thirdm
the aim is to control how the licensing propagates freedom (as he defines it) not just to one user but to who he or she distributes to and so on through the world and that a goal is to actively avoid providing anything for use within proprietary software.
|
If I fork a BSD project and make it proprietary, how am I revoking the rights of people who wish to use the BSD licensed version?
There is a difference between maintaining freedom and maintaining freedom as long as the use-case fits your personal philosophy.
Edit -
I would like to extend my personal definition of freedom, if I might. Freedom is the right to do what you want, when you want, where you want, with whom you want, however you want, in whatever matter you desire, so long as your actions do not infringe on the freedom of others.
If I fork an open source project into a proprietary project and extend said project with proprietary extensions, people have a choice of paying for my proprietary version or freely (typically) using the open source version. I have not revoked their freedoms in any way (I have provided them, to the contrary, with an alternative). If you say I have to now release my proprietary extensions to the world, you are in fact revoking my freedoms.
Control is control, no matter how you cut it.