Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Les Mikesell]

Gordon Messmer wrote:
> 
> The GPL allows you additional rights: you may distribute the work to 
> others.

The GPL only allows those rights under limited conditions.

> Standard EULAs give you *no* additional rights, and furthermore restrict 
> how you can use the software that you received.
> 
> The difference is vast.

Yes, most proprietary licenses make no attempt to prevent distribution 
of other software that might be combined with it.  In the case of 
libraries, the whole point of their existence is to permit such 
combinations, whereas the GPL prohibits it.

> You are so far divorced from reality that I've suspected you of trolling 
> for the entire discussion.  I wouldn't have replied, except that I'm 
> sure that *some* people actually believe some of the things you say, and 
> one of the goals of the Free Software movement is to educate people 
> about the truth of the matter.
> 
>> But a proprietary license rarely demands that you place restrictions 
>> on how other people can create new things and share them.
> 
> Proprietary licenses place absolute and total restrictions on how people 
> can create and share new things based on the licensed work.

What proprietary library has a license that restricts distribution of 
other works that use it?

-- 
    Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell at gmail.com