3 ms·

> The biggest risk of the GPL is in fact not companies but to you as a creator. If you plan on commercializing your work in any capacity, accepting contribution

> The biggest risk of the GPL is in fact not companies but to you as a creator. If you plan on commercializing your work in any capacity, accepting contributions under the GPL will be the end of that. If you accept contributions, that’s not your work anymore. That’s your work and your contributors work. You are still perfectly free of removing said work and commercialise your own. You just can’t profite from the work of others without asking them. That’s a feature of the license not a risk. > Given the murky laws around copyright reassignment getting contributions in under a more liberal license so you retain extra rights yourself is tricky. You are misrepresenting the situation once again. It is not about retaining your own right. The whole issue is on the work of others.

the_mitsuhiko 5y ago
Something does not stop being my work when it hat contributions from others but generally that’s besides the point. The main issue of GPL comes from the risk to the original creator itself. Others not using the software is less the concern.
- sangnoir 5y ago
  > The main issue of GPL comes from the risk to the original creator itself The risk of abiding by the license? The GPL ensures user have access to source code provided under the license, so I'm assuming by "commercializing" you mean hiding away source code that used to be public? The calculus is simple: if you want to make money by doing an open-source bait-and-switch, do not license your code under GPL.
  - the_mitsuhiko 5y ago
    Commercializing can happen in many ways. GPL code in itself can’t even be published on the app store without violating the license. If you are not the complete copyright holder you can run into issues very quickly.
    - sangnoir 5y ago
      > GPL code in itself can’t even be published on the app store without violating the license Did you mean without violating the app store EULA? Because the GPL places no restrictions on how generated binaries are distrubuted, only that the source be transmitted to any user upon request.
- pests 5y ago
  If a single line was written and contributed without copyright assignment, than line is theirs. The project can be yours, but you no longer own 100% rights to it.
  - the_mitsuhiko 5y ago
    Precisely. Which is why releasing code under the GPL requires a lot of up front consideration.
- WastingMyTime89 5y ago
  > Something does not stop being my work when it hat contributions from others Of course it does both from a legal and moral point of view. Composite work is the product of their authors plural. You are perfectly free to strip it from the contributions of others and relicense your actual work. > The main issue of GPL comes from the risk to the original creator itself You keep coming back to that but still have to explain what they are. Yes, the GPL prevents you from relicensing the work of your contributors. That's not a risk to the original creator itself.

the_mitsuhiko 5y ago

Something does not stop being my work when it hat contributions from others but generally that’s besides the point. The main issue of GPL comes from the risk to the original creator itself. Others not using the software is less the concern.

sangnoir 5y ago
> The main issue of GPL comes from the risk to the original creator itself The risk of abiding by the license? The GPL ensures user have access to source code provided under the license, so I'm assuming by "commercializing" you mean hiding away source code that used to be public? The calculus is simple: if you want to make money by doing an open-source bait-and-switch, do not license your code under GPL.
- the_mitsuhiko 5y ago
  Commercializing can happen in many ways. GPL code in itself can’t even be published on the app store without violating the license. If you are not the complete copyright holder you can run into issues very quickly.
  - sangnoir 5y ago
    > GPL code in itself can’t even be published on the app store without violating the license Did you mean without violating the app store EULA? Because the GPL places no restrictions on how generated binaries are distrubuted, only that the source be transmitted to any user upon request.
pests 5y ago
If a single line was written and contributed without copyright assignment, than line is theirs. The project can be yours, but you no longer own 100% rights to it.
- the_mitsuhiko 5y ago
  Precisely. Which is why releasing code under the GPL requires a lot of up front consideration.
WastingMyTime89 5y ago
> Something does not stop being my work when it hat contributions from others Of course it does both from a legal and moral point of view. Composite work is the product of their authors plural. You are perfectly free to strip it from the contributions of others and relicense your actual work. > The main issue of GPL comes from the risk to the original creator itself You keep coming back to that but still have to explain what they are. Yes, the GPL prevents you from relicensing the work of your contributors. That's not a risk to the original creator itself.