4 ms·

There have been multiple cases where GPL fanatics stole BSD code and relicensed it without discussing it with the original creators, which is technically permit

There have been multiple cases where GPL fanatics stole BSD code and relicensed it without discussing it with the original creators, which is technically permitted, but dirty as hell. Some wireless drivers for Linux derived from this theft. (Broadcom, being one)

caf 16y ago
There is a certain amount of cognitive dissonance evident here. The whole point of favouring the BSD license over the GPL is that you don't care how people license the code that they incorporate your code into. It makes no sense at all to be happy with someone "stealing" BSD code and putting it into a closed-source product, but not be happy with them putting it into a GPL-licensed product.
- JoachimSchipper 16y ago
  Actually, the OpenBSD people grumble about all the companies incorporating their code (mostly OpenSSH) and not contributing anything back, too. There's a difference between what is legally allowed and what is (considered) ethical. It's just that the GNU people, being (more or less) on the same team and fond of open-source retoric, are more vulnerable to pressure.
- alnayyir 16y ago
  The whole point of favoring BSD over GPL, in addition to prohibiting a GPL fork, is that I want the code and all derivations to be free for personal and commercial use with no obligations made upon the user/re-implementer.
  - caf 16y ago
    Then you have chosen completely the wrong license, because that is not what the BSD license provides. The BSD license allows derivations to be unmodifiable, or to be useable only with a fee paid, or any other restriction the copyright holder (of the derivation) cares to add. For example, a derivation of your code could be licensed under the hypothetical ICBINTGPL License ("I Can't Believe It's Not The GPL") that was the same as the GPL in all but name. The tension in what you want is evident in your comment: you "want the code and all derivations to be [list of attributes]", which implies obligations on the user of the code (amusingly, GPL-like obligations!); but you also want "no obligations made upon the user/re-implementer". So you want obligations that there be no obligations. That's the problem I'm trying to point out.
    - alnayyir 16y ago
      >Then you have chosen completely the wrong license, because that is not what the BSD license provides. You're silly, you haven't read the license. It's not BSD. http://github.com/bitemyapp/Scroot/blob/master/LICENSE http://github.com/bitemyapp/Scroot/blob/master/LICENSE There's no problem, and you aren't going to argue this into anything productive. I've made my decision, I'm going to let people do anything they want except relicense it in GPL or sue me. There is no debate here. I'm sorry I shared it in a fit of feeling 'cute'.
  - ErrantX 16y ago
    Well, I dislike the spirit of the GPL for similar reasons. But I find that clause even worse; because it is the same spirit as the GPL masquerading as something different :) One of the joys, I find, with BSD/MIT licensing is that you can watch the code do amazing things with no restriction.
    - stcredzero 16y ago
      Often BSD-licensed code achieves many of the same things the GPL was designed to achieve through entirely voluntary actions.

caf 16y ago

There is a certain amount of cognitive dissonance evident here. The whole point of favouring the BSD license over the GPL is that you don't care how people license the code that they incorporate your code into. It makes no sense at all to be happy with someone "stealing" BSD code and putting it into a closed-source product, but not be happy with them putting it into a GPL-licensed product.

JoachimSchipper 16y ago
Actually, the OpenBSD people grumble about all the companies incorporating their code (mostly OpenSSH) and not contributing anything back, too. There's a difference between what is legally allowed and what is (considered) ethical. It's just that the GNU people, being (more or less) on the same team and fond of open-source retoric, are more vulnerable to pressure.
alnayyir 16y ago
The whole point of favoring BSD over GPL, in addition to prohibiting a GPL fork, is that I want the code and all derivations to be free for personal and commercial use with no obligations made upon the user/re-implementer.
- caf 16y ago
  Then you have chosen completely the wrong license, because that is not what the BSD license provides. The BSD license allows derivations to be unmodifiable, or to be useable only with a fee paid, or any other restriction the copyright holder (of the derivation) cares to add. For example, a derivation of your code could be licensed under the hypothetical ICBINTGPL License ("I Can't Believe It's Not The GPL") that was the same as the GPL in all but name. The tension in what you want is evident in your comment: you "want the code and all derivations to be [list of attributes]", which implies obligations on the user of the code (amusingly, GPL-like obligations!); but you also want "no obligations made upon the user/re-implementer". So you want obligations that there be no obligations. That's the problem I'm trying to point out.
  - alnayyir 16y ago
    >Then you have chosen completely the wrong license, because that is not what the BSD license provides. You're silly, you haven't read the license. It's not BSD. http://github.com/bitemyapp/Scroot/blob/master/LICENSE http://github.com/bitemyapp/Scroot/blob/master/LICENSE There's no problem, and you aren't going to argue this into anything productive. I've made my decision, I'm going to let people do anything they want except relicense it in GPL or sue me. There is no debate here. I'm sorry I shared it in a fit of feeling 'cute'.
- ErrantX 16y ago
  Well, I dislike the spirit of the GPL for similar reasons. But I find that clause even worse; because it is the same spirit as the GPL masquerading as something different :) One of the joys, I find, with BSD/MIT licensing is that you can watch the code do amazing things with no restriction.
  - stcredzero 16y ago
    Often BSD-licensed code achieves many of the same things the GPL was designed to achieve through entirely voluntary actions.