3 ms·

What you are describing as "infection" is in fact an extra escape hatch for license violators not an extra restriction. If you incorporate closed source softwa

What you are describing as "infection" is in fact an extra escape hatch for license violators not an extra restriction. If you incorporate closed source software into your work you may stop distributing your software or rip it out possibly while paying a massive fine. If you incorporate GPL licensed software into your work you may stop distributing your software, rip it out, OR release your software as GPL. Furthermore while being discovered using someone else's proprietary software in yours will almost certainly result in at best a threat of near instant lawyer assisted corporate suicide using GPL software the same way has historically led to a strongly worded letter and months to years to fix your problem. This is to say that nearly all copyright is inherently viral and GPL is slightly less so than many because you have additional options. Hearing people, many of whom metaphorical develop software Ebola for a living describe the GPL as viral is in a word, amusing.

chrismorgan 5y ago
You’re comparing it with the wrong thing. When people speak of the GPL as infectious or viral, they’re comparing it with permissive licenses like MIT/Apache2, not closed-source licenses.
- michaelmrose 5y ago
  Particularly nobody says proprietary licensing is viral even though most licenses are and almost every refers to and focuses on the fact that you may avoid infringement by releasing the combined work under the GPL often confusing the fact that you can for must or even assuming that the combined work is automagically GPL. Also aficionados of permissive licensing seem to be frequently not only OK with proprietary licensing but approve of the fact that code can be used in such a fashion. It's almost as if the attitude is everyone's else's work MUST be free for ME to use in MY proprietary code else they are somehow taking away MY freedom!

chrismorgan 5y ago

You’re comparing it with the wrong thing. When people speak of the GPL as infectious or viral, they’re comparing it with permissive licenses like MIT/Apache2, not closed-source licenses.

michaelmrose 5y ago
Particularly nobody says proprietary licensing is viral even though most licenses are and almost every refers to and focuses on the fact that you may avoid infringement by releasing the combined work under the GPL often confusing the fact that you can for must or even assuming that the combined work is automagically GPL. Also aficionados of permissive licensing seem to be frequently not only OK with proprietary licensing but approve of the fact that code can be used in such a fashion. It's almost as if the attitude is everyone's else's work MUST be free for ME to use in MY proprietary code else they are somehow taking away MY freedom!