4 ms·

Yes. Answering a resounding "No" to the unspoken but common question, "Can my company use this work for free in ways which do not contribute in any way back to

Yes. Answering a resounding "No" to the unspoken but common question, "Can my company use this work for free in ways which do not contribute in any way back to the community that granted it to us, thereby reselling free work to improve our profit margin and IP portfolio."

bch 8y ago
> ...which do not contribute in any way > ...to improve our profit margin and IP portfolio. Pretty black and white presumptions (but license talks often end up that way).
- KirinDave 8y ago
  If so, what value does your comment bring to the discussion?
  - bch 8y ago
    Is there no way to criticize GPL without being considered a dead-weight parasite? Is there no case for not releasing code (immediately) than greed? Is there no other way to support a person/project other than that code? Are profit/loss the really the only concern for a project that can’t/won’t release code? ...
    - KirinDave 8y ago
      > Is there no way to criticize GPL without being considered a dead-weight parasite? Not with this attitude. "Why can't you just make the case for me?" There aren't many ways of reading this that offer honest intent. > Is there no case for not releasing code (immediately) than greed? You tell me what you had in mind. Security POCs come to mind. But since you didn't immediately point that out I think it's unlikely you had it in mind. > Are profit/loss the really the only concern for a project that can’t/won’t release code? I guess pride and/or selfishness?
mindslight 8y ago
Unless it's AGPL, that answer is actually still "Yes".
- KirinDave 8y ago
  What do you mean?
  - Buge 8y ago
    You can use GPL code in your company's servers. You cannot use GPL code in client binaries that you sell. You cannot use AGPL code in either.
    - KirinDave 8y ago
      Thanks. I actually misread their comment as the inverse of what it meant.
  - mindslight 8y ago
    GPL2 software can (so far [0]) be locked down via digital restrictions management. GPL3 software can be locked up by turning it into SaaS (software augmented w/ arbitrary surveillance). Both phenomena are really the market finding ways to undermine the fundamental freedoms that the GPL aimed for. IMHO rather than talking about "contributing back" I think a better standard is whether it's possible for an author to receive back a derivative of their own work yet be unable to modify it. [0] I'd personally love to see some GPL2 holders of eg Linux start going after eg Tivo on the grounds that they have not included all of the tools used to customarily build and install the software.

bch 8y ago

> ...which do not contribute in any way > ...to improve our profit margin and IP portfolio. Pretty black and white presumptions (but license talks often end up that way).

KirinDave 8y ago
If so, what value does your comment bring to the discussion?
- bch 8y ago
  Is there no way to criticize GPL without being considered a dead-weight parasite? Is there no case for not releasing code (immediately) than greed? Is there no other way to support a person/project other than that code? Are profit/loss the really the only concern for a project that can’t/won’t release code? ...
  - KirinDave 8y ago
    > Is there no way to criticize GPL without being considered a dead-weight parasite? Not with this attitude. "Why can't you just make the case for me?" There aren't many ways of reading this that offer honest intent. > Is there no case for not releasing code (immediately) than greed? You tell me what you had in mind. Security POCs come to mind. But since you didn't immediately point that out I think it's unlikely you had it in mind. > Are profit/loss the really the only concern for a project that can’t/won’t release code? I guess pride and/or selfishness?

mindslight 8y ago

Unless it's AGPL, that answer is actually still "Yes".

KirinDave 8y ago
What do you mean?
- Buge 8y ago
  You can use GPL code in your company's servers. You cannot use GPL code in client binaries that you sell. You cannot use AGPL code in either.
  - KirinDave 8y ago
    Thanks. I actually misread their comment as the inverse of what it meant.
- mindslight 8y ago
  GPL2 software can (so far [0]) be locked down via digital restrictions management. GPL3 software can be locked up by turning it into SaaS (software augmented w/ arbitrary surveillance). Both phenomena are really the market finding ways to undermine the fundamental freedoms that the GPL aimed for. IMHO rather than talking about "contributing back" I think a better standard is whether it's possible for an author to receive back a derivative of their own work yet be unable to modify it. [0] I'd personally love to see some GPL2 holders of eg Linux start going after eg Tivo on the grounds that they have not included all of the tools used to customarily build and install the software.