4 ms·
I doubt anyone using these kinds of licenses really thinks they are going to "work" from the point of view of significantly limiting that behaviour. They do, h
by Latty 7y ago
I doubt anyone using these kinds of licenses really thinks they are going to "work" from the point of view of significantly limiting that behaviour.
They do, however, act as a way to advertise the issues—this article being an example of how using a license like that causes people to publicise and maybe think about your issues.
The final suggestion in the article is working to enact better laws: starting and maintaining the conversation is the first step to doing that.
- rwmj 7y agoThey also act to stop people using your software since it won't be packaged in Linux distros and any companies considering it will run a mile as soon as they run it past their lawyers.
- catalogia 7y agoIf you want average Joes to use your software freely but dislike corporations, then picking a license that makes lawyers run might be the way to go. Or just use WTFPL and count on the profanity to offend conservative business sorts.
- jsjohnst 7y ago> then picking a license that makes lawyers run might be the way to go In most of corporate America, that would be GPL or AGPL licenses, from direct experience working with outside council at multiple employers defining licensing policies.
- catalogia 7y agoYes, AGPLv3 is a crowd favorite for flipping corporate users the bird.
- tyingq 7y agoAGPL maybe, but GPL doesn't seem to be a barrier. Linux, Emacs, MySQL, gcc, git, OpenJDK, etc...are everywhere in corporate America. Perhaps for libraries you link to that aren't LGPL.
- influx 7y agoGPL 2 usually wasn’t a problem, but version 3 is significantly limiting open source use in the industry.
- cycloptic 7y agoThat is by design. Companies that intend to ship locked-down devices or sue their own users for patent infringement are probably not going to be good open source actors anyway.
- rwmj 7y agoRed Hat ships tons of GPLv3 code to industries and organizations across the world and was just acquired for north of $30 billion.
- still_grokking 7y agoOne of the biggest Linux users (Google) is working on a replacement… Emacs? Really? It's quite common to replace MySQL/MariaDB with PostgreSQL these days. GCC? "Everybody" (BIG-CORP) is basing work on LLVM. OpenJDK? People can't stand it to this day that Oracle was so "evil" releasing OpenJDK under GPL. (And this is not even a "pure" GPL. It needs a exception). Git may be an exception form the "Don't touch GPL code!" "rule". But again BIG-CORP is often not using Git internally… Do you have more examples of GPL stuff being successful in BIG-CORP settings? GPL (especially v3) is used actively to prevent businesses to use code! This works because in commercial settings GPL is mostly everywhere verboten. Often you can have the exact same code under GPL, or a commercial license, and businesses are buying the commercial license only to avoid having some GPL code around. So I see GPL being a "barrier". One could even assume an anti-GPL campaign by BIG-CORP is going on for the last few years.
- tyingq 7y agoI'm not even sure where to start here. I'll just reiterate that every tool I mentioned is prevalent across corporate America. Industries like Oil and Gas, Healthcare, Banks, Telecoms, Airlines, Shipping Companies, Food Products, etc.
- dtech 7y agoGPL is only a problem as a dependency for your software, GPL software is widely used within corporations.
- jsjohnst 7y agoYes, it is widely used, but to say corporate lawyers don’t take issue with the GPL is definitely inaccurate in my experience.
- uncle_j 7y ago> I doubt anyone using these kinds of licenses really thinks they are going to "work" from the point of view of significantly limiting that behaviour. Which is the exact problem with it. I don't particularly like the term but it is essentially a virtue signal i.e. I am telling you to care about this because I am a good person. It is a form of slacktivism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slacktivism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slacktivism). > They do, however, act as a way to advertise the issues—this article being an example of how using a license like that causes people to publicise and maybe think about your issues. In my experience I find that it actually accomplishes the opposite. For many people there is enough politics in everyday life whether this is internal company politics, their local community or the maelstrom of national and international politics. People become burned out by it and then tend to resent it.
- damnyou 7y agoWhile you may or may not care about politics, if you are a member of certain groups politics cares about you. That is the unfortunate reality of the world we live in. However, I agree with Perens that licenses are the wrong vehicle for change.