3 ms·
It seems unwise to let control of your product degrade to the point where you cannot draw a line between code you own yourself and encumbered/external code. It
by colonwqbang 6y ago
It seems unwise to let control of your product degrade to the point where you cannot draw a line between code you own yourself and encumbered/external code. It should be possible to avoid with proper planning. Still, you're probably right that it is a common situation.
Your other examples mostly seem to boil down to "we were not willing to commit the necessary resources to do it". Which is fine, of course.
- johannes1234321 6y ago> Your other examples mostly seem to boil down to "we were not willing to commit the necessary resources to do it". Yes, of course. If I invest resources from the beginning for "I want to relicense and open all the code" then there is no problem. However for most companies the priority is "get this out before our competitor releases their product" and many things fall under and often neither developers nor managers have the legal knowledge (and don't care) And btw. I fully support this on a different level: For instance for devices like (home) routers I support a scheme where a company is required to publish the software once they cancel support, so one doesn't have to throw away fine working devices only since the vendor stops fixing security issues. But that won't happen quickly, as it goes through the supply chain: You need the device drivers for the chipsets etc.