6 ms·

If they don't care about companies leeching off of free work, why not license it under BSD? The whole point of the GPL is that it's an enforceable license.

by na85 9y ago

deathanatos 9y ago
They do care about companies leeching off of free work, is the point; they just don't want the outcome to be financial gain, rather, they want the companies to stop "leeching", and rather contribute their contributions back to the community, so that others can benefit from the work just as they benefited from the work those before them did. (This "contribute back" aspect is, IMO, the core difference between MIT/BSD and the GPL.)
- belltaco 9y ago
  But the companies that are forced to pay out large amounts are going to be more careful next time and release their contributions as source code. Same with other companies that see this going on. That's a win for Linux and GPL code.
  - shakna 9y ago
    In my experience, they'll either be much more careful about hiding their reliance, or just strip Linux out of everything. Not contribute back.
    - older 9y ago
      Could you give an example? Any company that stripped Linux out of their product?
      - shakna 9y ago
        Not without breaching an NDA. But how about a public case? Verizon got caught breaching the GPL with Busybox.[!] At the end of the day, they agreed to become compliant... And Busybox is no longer a product they use or distribute. [0][1] [!] https://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2008/mar/17/busybox-verizon/ https://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2008/mar/17/busybox-ver... [0] https://www.verizon.com/support/residential/internet/equipment/open-source-software https://www.verizon.com/support/residential/internet/equipme... [1] https://github.com/verizon https://github.com/verizon
        phaemon 9y ago
        Your link [1] has a link to a page with the Actiontec firmware downloads that includes Busybox. They clearly are still distributing it and are following the complience agreement. This appears to be an example that is the direct opposite of what you were trying to show.
        older 9y ago
        Busybox != Linux.
      - teddyh 9y ago
        Both Google and Apple are working hard on it.
    - pbhjpbhj 9y ago
      And you think by not punishing such companies then they'll come in to compliance? It strikes me such companies never intended to comply with their legal obligations - make that position financially untenable and use the money to support development/developers who are compliant.
      - shakna 9y ago
        That's not my position either. Most companies will see a lawsuit as an attack, and blacklist interacting with you in the future if they can. It reflects badly on the FOSS community, and makes future interactions even more difficult. There are a lot of businesses that will fight relying on any FOSS product, but leap at precisely the same thing with a paid license. However, more polite requests usually get canned without reading. This is a tough problem, with hypersensitive businesses thrown in the mix. Wielding the GPL like a hammer won't help, but ignoring it won't either.
        crdoconnor 9y ago
        >Most companies will see a lawsuit as an attack, and blacklist interacting with you in the future if they can. It reflects badly on the FOSS community, and makes future interactions even more difficult. There are a lot of businesses that will fight relying on any FOSS product The companies that will strip out FOSS from all of their products will have to cripple their product, increase their lead times and increase their costs - possibly all three. If FOSS is competing with their closed source product, that makes FOSS more competitive. If companies that respect FOSS compete with their product, that makes them more competitive. These are good things. I don't think it pays to accommodate companies with laywers that behave irrationally in response to enforcement of the GPL and it certainly doesn't pay to respond to bully tactics by relenting.
        vbezhenar 9y ago
        When Microsoft sues companies for using pirate Windows, they extort extra fines and payments and put people in jail. It doesn't seem to hurt them. FSF position is weak. If you're not fighting with claws and teethes, strong ones won't respect you, they'll continue to abuse you just to "comply" if they got caught and sued.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]

If they don't care about companies leeching off of free work, why not license it under BSD? The whole point of the GPL is that it's an enforceable license.

by na85 9y ago

If they don't care about companies leeching off of free work, why not license it under BSD? The whole point of the GPL is that it's an enforceable license.

deathanatos 9y ago

They do care about companies leeching off of free work, is the point; they just don't want the outcome to be financial gain, rather, they want the companies to stop "leeching", and rather contribute their contributions back to the community, so that others can benefit from the work just as they benefited from the work those before them did. (This "contribute back" aspect is, IMO, the core difference between MIT/BSD and the GPL.)

belltaco 9y ago
But the companies that are forced to pay out large amounts are going to be more careful next time and release their contributions as source code. Same with other companies that see this going on. That's a win for Linux and GPL code.
- shakna 9y ago
  In my experience, they'll either be much more careful about hiding their reliance, or just strip Linux out of everything. Not contribute back.
  - older 9y ago
    Could you give an example? Any company that stripped Linux out of their product?
    - shakna 9y ago
      Not without breaching an NDA. But how about a public case? Verizon got caught breaching the GPL with Busybox.[!] At the end of the day, they agreed to become compliant... And Busybox is no longer a product they use or distribute. [0][1] [!] https://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2008/mar/17/busybox-verizon/ https://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2008/mar/17/busybox-ver... [0] https://www.verizon.com/support/residential/internet/equipment/open-source-software https://www.verizon.com/support/residential/internet/equipme... [1] https://github.com/verizon https://github.com/verizon
      - phaemon 9y ago
        Your link [1] has a link to a page with the Actiontec firmware downloads that includes Busybox. They clearly are still distributing it and are following the complience agreement. This appears to be an example that is the direct opposite of what you were trying to show.
      - older 9y ago
        Busybox != Linux.
    - teddyh 9y ago
      Both Google and Apple are working hard on it.
  - pbhjpbhj 9y ago
    And you think by not punishing such companies then they'll come in to compliance? It strikes me such companies never intended to comply with their legal obligations - make that position financially untenable and use the money to support development/developers who are compliant.
    - shakna 9y ago
      That's not my position either. Most companies will see a lawsuit as an attack, and blacklist interacting with you in the future if they can. It reflects badly on the FOSS community, and makes future interactions even more difficult. There are a lot of businesses that will fight relying on any FOSS product, but leap at precisely the same thing with a paid license. However, more polite requests usually get canned without reading. This is a tough problem, with hypersensitive businesses thrown in the mix. Wielding the GPL like a hammer won't help, but ignoring it won't either.
      - crdoconnor 9y ago
        >Most companies will see a lawsuit as an attack, and blacklist interacting with you in the future if they can. It reflects badly on the FOSS community, and makes future interactions even more difficult. There are a lot of businesses that will fight relying on any FOSS product The companies that will strip out FOSS from all of their products will have to cripple their product, increase their lead times and increase their costs - possibly all three. If FOSS is competing with their closed source product, that makes FOSS more competitive. If companies that respect FOSS compete with their product, that makes them more competitive. These are good things. I don't think it pays to accommodate companies with laywers that behave irrationally in response to enforcement of the GPL and it certainly doesn't pay to respond to bully tactics by relenting.
      - vbezhenar 9y ago
        When Microsoft sues companies for using pirate Windows, they extort extra fines and payments and put people in jail. It doesn't seem to hurt them. FSF position is weak. If you're not fighting with claws and teethes, strong ones won't respect you, they'll continue to abuse you just to "comply" if they got caught and sued.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]