said by B 
:I understand; that's well written and sounds well-meaning, but isn't it just a bit ridiculous? The GPL is "holding back" these projects because the stubborn writers of the code YOU WANT TO SELL won't let you do it? But... they have no obligation to let you sell their code on
your terms! You're perfectly free to seek separate alternative licenses from those developers or to seek alternatives, as you've done.
Why aren't you just as mad at all the OTHER developers (you know, your closed-source competitors who write software that competes with yours) for not letting you freely redistribute /resell THEIR code on your terms? Why be angry only with GPL developers?
I understand your point, but it's just backwards. It's only "holding back" projects that seek to close up their sources, like your own. Agreed, I suppose that much is arguably "viral".
That said, I'm certainly glad you're respecting the license anyhow!
Lesser companies don't even think twice.
-- B
P.S. I'd point out how funny the part about "damn sure not going to allow anyone to redistribute our code" is for someone who wants to take advantage of redistributed "Free" (GPL) software, but I think it's self-apparent...
The GPL is too vague ... we aren't modifying any of the GPL code we use, but the guts of our software is patented. What's to stop someone from forcing us to open our code and prove it's not violating the GPL?
·
