Jeremy C. Reed said:
> Or you could say that: this is an example of how the GPL isn't as free
> as the BSD license since it doesn't protect your freedoms. If this had
> been software under the GPL license there would be no way to allow
> binary only.

I think arguing that the GPL is more free than the BSD is a losing
argument. (sorry Hans)  BSD is a 100% "freedom", but true freedom is
really anarchy.  For example, (at one time) this country afford lots of
freedom, but killing your neighbor was not a "freedom", because it just
isn't good for society. :)

The GPL to me is a license that gives "reasonable" freedoms.  That is it
affords freedomes with the confines of what is good for society.  Taking
other s work and extending it, then keeping your additions from others is
considered bad for society in the GPL authors eyes.  So there is freedom
afforded to the user and protection afforded to the author. :)

-Derek