Re: lynx-dev On invitations and pressure

[Philip Webb]

990205 David Woolley opined: 
> the GPL is often used because other people do it.
> many people have used it without really reading and understanding it;
> they have a vague concept of what they consider free
> which may often not actually comply with the FSF's definition.
> Only in the last year have those who do read the GPL started to rebel
> and there has been a lot of discussion about alternative licenses;
> the term "open source" is an attempt to avoid the connotations
> put on "free" by the FSF.

there is a bit of Orwell in the FSF's use of `free'.
i'ld still like to know who owns & controls FSF
& how far its copyrights are enforceable in law & in real life.

> in the case of Lynx, those who now understand are beginning to regret it
> in the area of the Secure Sockets Layer;
> it is not nice to have to tell people that you cannnot supply,
> what is becoming an essential function,
> in part because of the licence under which the code is distributed.
> the current dominant market for "free" (used loosely) software is
> Windows 95 users, who have no capability to, nor any  interest in
> building from source (or assembling systems from components),
> & most see no distinction between downloading a binary of GPLed software,
> & closed source, proprietory, software like Internet Explorer.
> they are both things they download from the internet
> with no legal requirement to handover money and then install and run.
> They don't understand why IE should support SSL and Lynx not,
> and either abandon Lynx or get an illegal copy,
> rather than complaining to their senator about patent law.
 
this is a very important issue.
what would be involved in changing the licensing of Lynx?

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : address@hidden
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto