[BadVista Advocate] Help "Hotline"

[Matthew Flaschen]

Don Hensley wrote:
> I was wondering if it matters that otfc is pure Python, which is absolutely 
> not GPL --they specifically state the ways they differ from the GPL on their 
> web site.
> http://www.python.org/psf/license/

It's completely fine.  All the Python licenses have been free, and the
current one is GPL-compatible (which is desirable because there's such a
large body of GPL work already and it's the FSF's preferred license).
See http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#SoftwareLicenses

> In part: "There is no GPL-like "copyleft" restriction.

The FSF (and I) prefers copyleft essentially for strategic reasons; it's
a means to /keep/ software free.  However, non-copyleft free licenses
still grant users freedom so they're completely okay.  There's lots of
non-copyleft free software in gnewsense, for example.  And of course the
FSF uses Apache (which has a non-copyleft license) to run their servers.

> And also, as otfc is actually a subset of SPI , which is a fine project, but 
> totally Open Source centric, rather then GPL centric, does the otfc stance  
> matter?

It really doesn't matter.  They don't seem to interfere with the
channels and they run on software that is both Free and open source (as
far as I know).

> is someone going to come along and bring up these 
> issues (I mean in a complaining about them manner)?

I don't know, but I think it would be difficult to object to this
without being very hypocritical.

Matt Flaschen