GPL is both Open Source and Free.
OSI states it is Open Source.
FSF states it is Free.
1 Like
FSF is ownership for GPL, not the OSI.
FREE does not mean anything. just Free Software, you need learn more.
It is correct that the FSF has the copyright for the GPL license text but that does not matter here. The GPL complies with the OSIâs definition for Open Source and therefore software with the above mentioned GPL licenses is Open Source software. 
Thatâs about definition. GPL is no software, therefore the GPL cannot be Free Software.
Software under GPL license is Free Software. When I wrote âFreeâ before I logically meant Free in terms of the FSF Free Software definition.
Sorry, mate.
1 Like
Definition matter to be clear, at the moment there are ridiculous terms under GPL, OSS FLOSS,FOSS.
Well you call whatever you want to GPL not just opensh!t but genuine it is Free Software.
No sir.
If you love opensource go for Haiku or BSD, IOS. Pure OS it purely Free Software. Yeah Ubuntu it there too if you love opensource ideology.
Thatâs correct and while I keep backing up my statements with some evidence, you just counter with ânoâ and continue with some platitudes.
Iâm thinking about coding a bot (applying GPL license to it so that it is Open Source and Free Software) which only keeps making forum posts with beep blub, GPL is a software license for both Free Software (FSF) and Open Source Software (OSI).
1 Like
Too bad, you just doing what other antiRMS and cheaper programmer they doing.
You can, but does not genuine.
Why is applying GPL license to some software âantiRMSâ? He wrote that license text. And last time I saw him live here in Germany I remember he still encourages people to use GPL.
Yes, it is. I backed that with evidence.
1 Like
I KNOW but u are really influenced for other cheaper opensources. This forum is for free software Purism Pure OS systems, this not Ubuntu forum to talk too much for opensources. opensource it better than propietary, but Free Software is the best than propietary and openfunny.
OSI it same like Pine64, just cloning everything⌠=)
You are the one confused. You really need to read more from the FSF link I provided ( https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html ). This is RMSâs views on all of the various well-known licenses and whether they are âFreeâ (or not), âCopyleftâ (or not), and compatible with various GPL licenses (or not).
- MIT. The link talks about confusion with the MIT license, but whether this is the X11 License version or the Expat License version, RMS says about the MIT License:
This is a lax, permissive non-copyleft free software license, compatible with the GNU GPL.
- MPLv2.
This is a free software license. Section 3.3 provides indirect compatibility between this license and the GNU GPL version 2.0, the GNU LGPL version 2.1, the GNU AGPL version 3, and all later versions of those licenses.
That should give you a clue that you donât know what youâre talking about. You donât seem to understand that something could be both OpenSource and Free. You also seem to confuse âFreeâ with âCopyleftâ. The point of Copyleft is that it disallows contributors from adding things and licensing the additions in a non-Free way.
There are tons of Free licenses (many, but not all, Opensource licenses are Free), but the main âCopyleftâ licenses are things like the GPL (various versions), CDDL, MPL, ⌠There are good discussions, such as why the MPLv1 is copyleft, but is not compatible with the GPL licenses (itâs basically the same reason why the GPLv2-only license is not compatible with GPLv3) while the MPLv2 is compatible with the GPL. I fear, though that this is all above your head and that youâll simply continue freaking out.
Hereâs the definition of Copyleft: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/copyleft.html
This thread is a dumpster fire, I regret my involvement in it, and carlosg is clearly trolling or unwilling to engage in what others are saying.
Iâm issuing a notice to all involved including myself that forum rules say
and Iâm closing this thread on the grounds that itâs been derailed at the very start. Please open the question again if you feel like it, and weâll try to keep it useful.
4 Likes