Care to elaborate?

Taking into account most code is written with the intent of releasing an application to the general population, the previous AC has a point. The freedom to not make your changes public is in fact important.

Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with the GPL. It's just not for everything. The GPL does in fact require to make your changes public, if you release the application publicly. This isn't a problem with the license mind you. If this is what the original author of the code intended, then the license is working just fine.

I personally find this argument of which license is most "free" (libre or beer) to be an idiotic one. As the author of code, don't pick a license simply because it's most "free". Pick a license based strictly on what you want the end user to be able to do with both the code and binary. End of discussion.

It's always annoyed me when people have spoken about the GPL as if it's a living, breathing, entity. It is a license and nothing more, not a culture, nor a way of life.

Unless the GPL is found to not be legally binding, the GPL as a license will never be in danger of anything.

NOTE: Please don't take this as a personal attack. Had I mod points I'd mod you insightful for everything else you had to say.

I wasn't even aware that people _had_ invites to give out! Oh Lord and Master, will you not bestow upon me the wonder that is a Quake Live invite? On another note, how is the matchmaking and such via Quake Live? I understand it's still in beta, but I'd like to know how it's coming along. Are there persistent stats between games? Is the ladder system working well? I'd be grateful for an invite: btaylor at fuzzylogicstudios dot com