6 ms·

> Production use of the software requires a commercial license from Lightbend I.e. it's not free anymore. That's what the title should say, instead we get an h

by tus666 4y ago

> Production use of the software requires a commercial license from Lightbend I.e. it's not free anymore. That's what the title should say, instead we get an history lesson.

makeitdouble 4y ago
The license change is prominent in the title, even if digging into the exact price and terms part comes a few paragraphs down. History lessons are always weird in these kind of announcements, but I think this one isn't that bad or deceptive in its approach.
Dylan16807 4y ago
It's not free any more for companies >$25M in annual revenue.
- josephcsible 4y ago
  It's not gratis anymore for companies >$25M in annual revenue. It's not free as in speech anymore for anyone.
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    If we consider the idea of "free speech FOR x" then is it really free speech for nobody? Most people can do anything they want with it.
    - josephcsible 4y ago
      I can't combine it with GPL'd programs.
      - Dylan16807 4y ago
        Not even locally? And even then that's mostly because the GPL won't let you. You can combine it with MIT license programs, right?
        josephcsible 4y ago
        > Not even locally? So much for freedom to distribute, I guess. > And even then that's mostly because the GPL won't let you. You can combine it with MIT license programs, right? How about this instead? I can't release a free derivative work of it.
        Dylan16807 4y ago
        If we go back to "free speech for [category of people]", then you can release a derivative that's free for most users and all individuals. That's part of why I find that wording interesting. It's not free to everyone but there are often legal restrictions even on GPL code...
        josephcsible 4y ago
        > there are often legal restrictions even on GPL code The difference is that they don't restrict freedom, but rather the power to withhold freedom from others: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/freedom-or-power.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/freedom-or-power.en.html
        Dylan16807 4y ago
        No I mean like export and patent and anti-circumvention and author's rights. Things that restrict freedom.
        josephcsible 4y ago
        Can you give an example of GPL'd software that actually has such restrictions?
        Dylan16807 4y ago
        Cryptographic libraries might be okay right now but traditionally have had very widespread export controls. So, linux kernel and basically anything doing crypto. Anything with german authors has irrevocable control tied to that. If there's a GPL program that decrypts blurays it's likely a violation of the DMCA, not sure if one exists right now. For patents, there's tons. x264 is an easy one.

by tus666 4y ago

> Production use of the software requires a commercial license from Lightbend I.e. it's not free anymore. That's what the title should say, instead we get an history lesson.

makeitdouble 4y ago

The license change is prominent in the title, even if digging into the exact price and terms part comes a few paragraphs down. History lessons are always weird in these kind of announcements, but I think this one isn't that bad or deceptive in its approach.

Dylan16807 4y ago

It's not free any more for companies >$25M in annual revenue.

josephcsible 4y ago
It's not gratis anymore for companies >$25M in annual revenue. It's not free as in speech anymore for anyone.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  If we consider the idea of "free speech FOR x" then is it really free speech for nobody? Most people can do anything they want with it.
  - josephcsible 4y ago
    I can't combine it with GPL'd programs.
    - Dylan16807 4y ago
      Not even locally? And even then that's mostly because the GPL won't let you. You can combine it with MIT license programs, right?
      - josephcsible 4y ago
        > Not even locally? So much for freedom to distribute, I guess. > And even then that's mostly because the GPL won't let you. You can combine it with MIT license programs, right? How about this instead? I can't release a free derivative work of it.
        Dylan16807 4y ago
        If we go back to "free speech for [category of people]", then you can release a derivative that's free for most users and all individuals. That's part of why I find that wording interesting. It's not free to everyone but there are often legal restrictions even on GPL code...
        josephcsible 4y ago
        > there are often legal restrictions even on GPL code The difference is that they don't restrict freedom, but rather the power to withhold freedom from others: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/freedom-or-power.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/freedom-or-power.en.html
        Dylan16807 4y ago
        No I mean like export and patent and anti-circumvention and author's rights. Things that restrict freedom.
        josephcsible 4y ago
        Can you give an example of GPL'd software that actually has such restrictions?
        Dylan16807 4y ago
        Cryptographic libraries might be okay right now but traditionally have had very widespread export controls. So, linux kernel and basically anything doing crypto. Anything with german authors has irrevocable control tied to that. If there's a GPL program that decrypts blurays it's likely a violation of the DMCA, not sure if one exists right now. For patents, there's tons. x264 is an easy one.