Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Artifex misstates the effects of the GPL

JanMark (547992) writes | more than 4 years ago

GNU is Not Unix 1

JanMark (547992) writes "Ghostscript was originally written by L Peter Deutsch and released under the GPL. Later, Aladdin Enterprises distributed a Ghostscript fork under a proprietary license. Currently Artifex Software exercises a commercial and a Copyleft license on Ghostscript. A friend of mine asked me if he could distribute Ghostscript as post processor for the output of a proprietary program. I told him, "Under GPL? No problem!" But he pointed me to the Artifex Licensing Information page. They seemed to have a very narrow view on what the GPL allows. So I wrote rms and he agrees with me. Artifex's description of the effects of the GPL is incorrect. IMHO, it even borders on fraud. It also has a very damaging side effect. Lots of people already think that any usage of GPLed software means they have to give away their own software for free (beer and speech). Actually it is the most common misconception I encounter. It makes me wonder maybe the misconception comes from within?"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

It's sad... (1)

kantos (1314519) | more than 4 years ago | (#30377342)

....when even I who has yet to pass the gpl quiz [] can tell that they seriously don't understand the gpl....
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?