1998-10-06 - Re: propose: `cypherpunks license’ (Re: Wanted: Twofish source code)

Header Data

From: Rick Campbell <rick@campbellcentral.org>
To: rms@gnu.org
Message Hash: 94e84eeb1274d0f4f5a0576d39d4331918c7b5480863556006ff39e5d005e0ff
Message ID: <199810071026.GAA20270@germs.dyn.ml.org>
Reply To: <199810062305.RAA29198@wijiji.santafe.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1998-10-06 12:32:22 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 20:32:22 +0800

Raw message

From: Rick Campbell <rick@campbellcentral.org>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 20:32:22 +0800
To: rms@gnu.org
Subject: Re: propose: `cypherpunks license' (Re: Wanted: Twofish source code)
In-Reply-To: <199810062305.RAA29198@wijiji.santafe.edu>
Message-ID: <199810071026.GAA20270@germs.dyn.ml.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Boundary..3997.1071713808.multipart/signed"

Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

    Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 17:05:42 -0600
    From: Richard Stallman <rms@santafe.edu>
    If you want to use our code in non-free software, and leave your users
    (who would then be our users also) no freedom, it is understandable
    that you would ask for this.

No, I simply don't want to discriminate against users who are writing
proprietary software, i. e. I don't want to restrict the freedom of
those users in the way that GPL does.

Public Domain status denotes more freedom than GPL.  It allows all of
the freedom of GPL and in addition, it allows the freedom of making
proprietary modifications.

The results of the proprietary step may be less free than GPL, but the
code placed in the Public Domain is still more free than the code
released under the terms of the GPL.


Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="pgp00001.pgp"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="pgp00001.pgp"
Content-Description: "PGP signature"