4 ms·

> many people were outraged by even this limited requirement It isn’t a limited requirements. There is a very real legal risk that using GPL software in an ent

> many people were outraged by even this limited requirement It isn’t a limited requirements. There is a very real legal risk that using GPL software in an enterprise code base means you have to open source of your entire code base. That is an unacceptable risk for almost any business so GPL software doesn’t get used.

35fbe7d3d5b9 6y ago
> That is an unacceptable risk for almost any business so GPL software doesn’t get used. And this, right there, is how MySQL AB was purchased for a billion dollars in 2008: you dual-license your software. Release it under a copyleft license that bigco's don't want to touch (AGPL3 is tempting today!), and offer a commercial license that gives your customers the freedom to use it as they need.
Blackthorn 6y ago
So the companies can simply buy an alternate licence. What's the problem? They end up giving back in terms of $$$ then.
- warkdarrior 6y ago
  Some projects do not offer alternate/dual licensing.
  - pydry 6y ago
    I'm pretty sure a lot of projects would be open to doing it if offered $$$.
lacker 6y ago
That is an unacceptable risk for almost any business so GPL software doesn’t get used. Plenty of companies use Linux... this seems like something people worried about in the 90's but have now generally accepted.
- ABeeSea 6y ago
  Linux system libraries are released under Lesser GPL and/or have exemptions for linking that the general GPL does not have. I worked at $bigtechco$ and anything GPL/AGPL was expressly forbidden by the lawyers.
pjc50 6y ago
Well .. yes. That's the license fee. If you incorporate Oracle code or Nintendo characters in your software you'll get sued as well. So no you can't use GPLd libraries without contributing forward. This is intentional and the purpose of copyleft. GPL allows you to "use" but not "make derived works".
- ABeeSea 6y ago
  And most companies have decided that the fee of opening their entire code base to use a single GPL library isn’t worth it. That is heft license fee if you have invested billions into creating your company’s source code.
lmm 6y ago
This is FUD. The worst case for GPL software is that you're not complying with the license and you're liable for statutory damages for copyright infringement. Not coincidentally that's also the worst case for every other license, including BSD/MIT, commercial proprietary licenses, and everything in between. You're sadly right that many big enterprises purport to believe there's some special extra risk unique to the GPL, but you're wrong to say it's a "very real legal risk"; there's no reasonable basis for believing that at all.

35fbe7d3d5b9 6y ago

> That is an unacceptable risk for almost any business so GPL software doesn’t get used. And this, right there, is how MySQL AB was purchased for a billion dollars in 2008: you dual-license your software. Release it under a copyleft license that bigco's don't want to touch (AGPL3 is tempting today!), and offer a commercial license that gives your customers the freedom to use it as they need.

Blackthorn 6y ago

So the companies can simply buy an alternate licence. What's the problem? They end up giving back in terms of $$$ then.

warkdarrior 6y ago
Some projects do not offer alternate/dual licensing.
- pydry 6y ago
  I'm pretty sure a lot of projects would be open to doing it if offered $$$.

lacker 6y ago

That is an unacceptable risk for almost any business so GPL software doesn’t get used. Plenty of companies use Linux... this seems like something people worried about in the 90's but have now generally accepted.

ABeeSea 6y ago
Linux system libraries are released under Lesser GPL and/or have exemptions for linking that the general GPL does not have. I worked at $bigtechco$ and anything GPL/AGPL was expressly forbidden by the lawyers.

pjc50 6y ago

Well .. yes. That's the license fee. If you incorporate Oracle code or Nintendo characters in your software you'll get sued as well. So no you can't use GPLd libraries without contributing forward. This is intentional and the purpose of copyleft. GPL allows you to "use" but not "make derived works".

ABeeSea 6y ago
And most companies have decided that the fee of opening their entire code base to use a single GPL library isn’t worth it. That is heft license fee if you have invested billions into creating your company’s source code.

lmm 6y ago

This is FUD. The worst case for GPL software is that you're not complying with the license and you're liable for statutory damages for copyright infringement. Not coincidentally that's also the worst case for every other license, including BSD/MIT, commercial proprietary licenses, and everything in between. You're sadly right that many big enterprises purport to believe there's some special extra risk unique to the GPL, but you're wrong to say it's a "very real legal risk"; there's no reasonable basis for believing that at all.