4 ms·
It's scary to think that the people that have talked about Freedom for so long are getting just as restrictive and bad as the RIAA/MPAA. Despite your scare lan
by quadhome 16y ago
It's scary to think that the people that have talked about Freedom for so long are getting just as restrictive and bad as the RIAA/MPAA.
Despite your scare language, this isn't new. "Why you shouldn't use the Lesser GPL for your next library" [1] was written in 1999.
One of the defining features of the GPL (or any copyleft license) is its reciprocal or "viral" nature. It was created to define an ecosystem distinct from one where source could be encumbered or hidden. And has been updated many times to maintain that ideology in the face of changing laws and legal precedents.
It's a choice to work in the GPL ecosystem. There's a lot of BSD software offering an option that many argue is "more free."
[1] http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html
- rick888 16y ago"One of the defining features of the GPL (or any copyleft license) is its reciprocal or "viral" nature. It was created to define an ecosystem distinct from one where source could be encumbered or hidden. And has been updated many times to maintain that ideology in the face of changing laws and legal precedents." There needs to be more warnings out there for businesses to steer clear of anything under the GPL. To call the GPL "freedom" is just laughable. It's a vile license used to feed a political movement. Nothing more.
- quadhome 16y agoI'm sorry I bit for your earlier troll.
- prodigal_erik 16y agoThe text of the GPL is very clear about what it's trying to accomplish on behalf of end users. The industry has been publicly debating the ethics and consequences of copyleft for literally decades. If anyone still hasn't figured out whether it's appropriate for their business (which is far from the hardest decision they'll ever face!) there's just no reaching them.