cypherpunks Digest, Vol 19, Issue 11

Thu Jan 8 10:48:49 PST 2015

Dude, instructions for unsubscribing are right there in the mail you're replying to. Follow them.

On 8 January 2015 18:04:32 GMT+00:00, John Elicker <jwelicker at gmail.com> wrote:
>Please unsubscribe
>
>On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 10:00 AM, <cypherpunks-request at cpunks.org>
>wrote:
>
>> Send cypherpunks mailing list submissions to
>>         cypherpunks at cpunks.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>         https://cpunks.org/mailman/listinfo/cypherpunks
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>         cypherpunks-request at cpunks.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>         cypherpunks-owner at cpunks.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of cypherpunks digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>    1. Re: Rant on BSD vs GPL was [Good ol' BSD vs. GPL] (grarpamp)
>>    2. Re: Rant on BSD vs GPL was [Good ol' BSD vs. GPL] (Cathal
>(Phone))
>>
>>
>>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 04:26:15 -0500
>> From: grarpamp <grarpamp at gmail.com>
>> To: cypherpunks at cpunks.org
>> Subject: Re: Rant on BSD vs GPL was [Good ol' BSD vs. GPL]
>> Message-ID:
>>         <CAD2Ti2_=
>> de+t7C3swNoJW9jx8kGJu9P2M_1bhauZ9P3xHvf30Q at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Ted Smith <tedks at riseup.net> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2015-01-07 at 11:33 +0000, Cathal Garvey wrote:
>> >> The GPL acknowledges this by forbidding suits within the scope of
>the
>> >> work (I think: GPL experts on-list?), preventing E3 from
>occurring.
>> >> Other licenses often take steps in this direction, but the
>> >> ultra-short
>> >> "friendly and permissive" licenses usually don't
>>
>> Probably because their model and vision is different, they're
>> not really out to modify the world beyond saying "here you
>> go, it's free", only out to modify the code, so they've little
>> interest in legal longtexts or lawyers.
>>
>> >> terse and legally unenforceable way that they might as well not
>be.
>> >
>> > The GPLv3+ contains this sort of patent protection
>>
>> Section 10, last paragraph, last part. Don't know if that has been
>tested
>> in court as other parts have been in the news. And all of paragraph
>11,
>> which grants patents.
>>
>> https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
>>
>> >> Freedom is not merely defined in law but in experience, and simply
>> >> removing explicit limitations on freedom (copyleft licenses) does
>not
>> >> mean that the total freedom in the world has increased.
>> >
>> > BSD advocates, I think, are not interested in total freedom in the
>> > world. This is a CONSEQUENCE or OUTCOME of a choice, not the choice
>> > itself.
>>
>> > boils down to consequentialist morals on the GPL side, and
>deontological
>> > or rule-based morals on the BSD side.
>>
>> Yes, depends on definition of freedom. Unfortunately GPL and BSD
>people
>> seem define that differently.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 10:40:37 +0000
>> From: "Cathal (Phone)" <cathalgarvey at cathalgarvey.me>
>> To: grarpamp <grarpamp at gmail.com>, cypherpunks at cpunks.org
>> Subject: Re: Rant on BSD vs GPL was [Good ol' BSD vs. GPL]
>> Message-ID: <249E482B-33E1-4653-B035-8D06B083F6AB at cathalgarvey.me>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> I don't think it's unfortunate, I think it's complementary. GPL is
>> valuable for trailblazing and stamping.out new territory because it
>> prevents E3, BSD is valuable because it helps shitty tech companies
>migrate
>> to standards that aren't total snakeoil. Between the two, the world
>> improves. Obviously I think GPL is better and more important, but
>that
>> doesn't mean I disparage or undervalue other open work.
>>
>> On 8 January 2015 09:26:15 GMT+00:00, grarpamp <grarpamp at gmail.com>
>wrote:
>> >On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Ted Smith <tedks at riseup.net> wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 2015-01-07 at 11:33 +0000, Cathal Garvey wrote:
>> >>> The GPL acknowledges this by forbidding suits within the scope of
>> >the
>> >>> work (I think: GPL experts on-list?), preventing E3 from
>occurring.
>> >>> Other licenses often take steps in this direction, but the
>> >>> ultra-short
>> >>> "friendly and permissive" licenses usually don't
>> >
>> >Probably because their model and vision is different, they're
>> >not really out to modify the world beyond saying "here you
>> >go, it's free", only out to modify the code, so they've little
>> >interest in legal longtexts or lawyers.
>> >
>> >>> terse and legally unenforceable way that they might as well not
>be.
>> >>
>> >> The GPLv3+ contains this sort of patent protection
>> >
>> >Section 10, last paragraph, last part. Don't know if that has been
>> >tested
>> >in court as other parts have been in the news. And all of paragraph
>11,
>> >which grants patents.
>> >
>> >https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
>> >
>> >>> Freedom is not merely defined in law but in experience, and
>simply
>> >>> removing explicit limitations on freedom (copyleft licenses) does
>> >not
>> >>> mean that the total freedom in the world has increased.
>> >>
>> >> BSD advocates, I think, are not interested in total freedom in the
>> >> world. This is a CONSEQUENCE or OUTCOME of a choice, not the
>choice
>> >> itself.
>> >
>> >> boils down to consequentialist morals on the GPL side, and
>> >deontological
>> >> or rule-based morals on the BSD side.
>> >
>> >Yes, depends on definition of freedom. Unfortunately GPL and BSD
>people
>> >seem define that differently.
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>>
>http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20150108/686d50be/attachment-0001.html
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cypherpunks mailing list
>> cypherpunks at cpunks.org
>> https://cpunks.org/mailman/listinfo/cypherpunks
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> End of cypherpunks Digest, Vol 19, Issue 11
>> *******************************************
>>

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 8910 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20150108/3fb982d2/attachment-0001.txt>