The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Copyright response from Pine Development

Well, I sent a request to one of the developers at Pine for information as
to why they don't provide a GPL or other free license. I have enclosed the
reply because it is so strange. Is this just another example of how poorly
Richard S. makes friends and influences people, or are these folks at Pine
just too weird for words?

-------------------------------  begin copy  ----------------------------

>From MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU Wed Apr 24 13:43:29 1996
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 10:51:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU>
To: Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net>
Subject: re: Pine 3.93 CPYRIGHT

I am the wrong person to ask.  I have nothing to do with this.  But,
basically, here is the unofficial story.  Again, I have nothing to do with
this; I didn't make the policy and I'm not the one to talk to about changing
it.  So flaming me is useless.

Richard Stallman is lying.  He is spreading FUD.  I think that it is out of a
meglomanial desire to control all free software according to his own
definition of morality.

The only "restrictions" are:
	1) if you modify Pine, you should put an "L" after the version number
	   (e.g. "3.93L").  This is so we can know if a bug report comes in
	   from a modified Pine.
	2) for-profit organizations must ask UW for permission before
	   distributing Pine.  All this means is that they must recognize UW's
	   rights.  They can not claim to have "taken over Pine" and then sue
	   UW to stop Pine work at UW.  UW has never said "no", and never
	   intends to say "no".

The GPL is much more restrictive.  The GPL prohibts people from modifying Pine
and distributing it unless they also give out sources.  It makes it impossible
to build any derivative proprietary products if any GNU code is present.

Unlike Stallman, we don't dictate the morality of others.  We just protect our
own rights to develop and distribute Pine.

If Debian wishes to join Stallman in intellectual dishonesty, that's their
choice.  We can't tell Debian what to do.
-------------------------------------------  end copy  -------------------

Any thoughts?

Dwarf

------------                                          --------------

aka   Dale Scheetz                   Phone:   1 (904) 877-0257
      Flexible Software              Fax:     NONE 
      Black Creek Critters           e-mail:  dwarf@polaris.net

------------ If you don't see what you want, just ask --------------