2 ms·

The "practicality" argument doesn't hold water with me: none of it matters without freedom. If you care about code, the GPL gives you freedom by requiring that

The "practicality" argument doesn't hold water with me: none of it matters without freedom. If you care about code, the GPL gives you freedom by requiring that people give back in the manner they take: with code. It is only necessary because people weren't giving back. I can understand that someone might want to shirk the quid-pro-quo responsibilities of the GPL, but I won't be paying for that kind of anti-social product.

nikcub 15y ago
"freedom by requiring" < see the contradiction? true freedom has no requirements or demands.
- vy8vWJlco 15y ago
  I do, but I care about CODE. Without code, I didn't GET freedom. :)
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- mikegerwitz 15y ago
  The free software movement aims to protect the freedom of the users, not developers (although the user could be a developer). Developers are in a position to control their users unfairly, so providing them the freedom under a permissive license does nothing but to further endanger the freedom of the user. This is an important distinction. Those who focus on the freedom of other developers miss the point of the free software movement. Consider an individual looking to rob a bank with a pistol (as opposed to robbing a user's freedom with their own software). Before the robbery, they notice a permissive amory across the street. Your permissively licensed software is that armory. You are empowering that individual to blow a hole through the bank rather than hold someone at gunpoint. Your software, as great as it is, can also be used to lure in users for exploitation. Nothing like a heavily armed robber with candy!
- kbolino 15y ago
  True freedom also doesn't exist. The mere act of publishing something carries with it an implicit claim of copyright. Thus, the GPL substitutes one set of restrictions for another.
crusso 15y ago
It's the old "you can catch more flies with honey rather than vinegar". The GPL is the strongest vinegar to businesses that may not mind participating in open source, but don't want to have their business assets dependent upon something so restrictive. As a developer you have a trade-off decision to make: Choose the license that restricts the use of your creation in hopes that it forces others to share, or choose a license that may end up being used for private commercial reasons - but will likely be more widely adopted because it's less restrictive. The beauty of the whole system in my mind is that each developer is free to make his own choice.
- MatthewPhillips 15y ago
  This is why I use the MPL.
- vy8vWJlco 15y ago
  Nothing wrong with choice. I think it's important that people treat me fairly. That's practicality, IMHO.
  - crusso 15y ago
    I guess. That's kind of the decision that a lot of console or heavy copy protection game producers make: We want to get paid for every copy of our game that is played. Then a lot of no copy protection PC game producers make a different decision: We want as many people as possible to play our game. Some will pirate it and not pay us. We hope that many more will do the right thing and pay for it if they like it.
    - vy8vWJlco 15y ago
      Yep. Luckily the sky is rising! :) http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120129/17272817580/sky-is-rising-entertainment-industry-is-large-growing-not-shrinking.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120129/17272817580/sky-is...

nikcub 15y ago

"freedom by requiring" < see the contradiction? true freedom has no requirements or demands.

vy8vWJlco 15y ago
I do, but I care about CODE. Without code, I didn't GET freedom. :)
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
mikegerwitz 15y ago
The free software movement aims to protect the freedom of the users, not developers (although the user could be a developer). Developers are in a position to control their users unfairly, so providing them the freedom under a permissive license does nothing but to further endanger the freedom of the user. This is an important distinction. Those who focus on the freedom of other developers miss the point of the free software movement. Consider an individual looking to rob a bank with a pistol (as opposed to robbing a user's freedom with their own software). Before the robbery, they notice a permissive amory across the street. Your permissively licensed software is that armory. You are empowering that individual to blow a hole through the bank rather than hold someone at gunpoint. Your software, as great as it is, can also be used to lure in users for exploitation. Nothing like a heavily armed robber with candy!
kbolino 15y ago
True freedom also doesn't exist. The mere act of publishing something carries with it an implicit claim of copyright. Thus, the GPL substitutes one set of restrictions for another.

crusso 15y ago

It's the old "you can catch more flies with honey rather than vinegar". The GPL is the strongest vinegar to businesses that may not mind participating in open source, but don't want to have their business assets dependent upon something so restrictive. As a developer you have a trade-off decision to make: Choose the license that restricts the use of your creation in hopes that it forces others to share, or choose a license that may end up being used for private commercial reasons - but will likely be more widely adopted because it's less restrictive. The beauty of the whole system in my mind is that each developer is free to make his own choice.

MatthewPhillips 15y ago
This is why I use the MPL.
vy8vWJlco 15y ago
Nothing wrong with choice. I think it's important that people treat me fairly. That's practicality, IMHO.
- crusso 15y ago
  I guess. That's kind of the decision that a lot of console or heavy copy protection game producers make: We want to get paid for every copy of our game that is played. Then a lot of no copy protection PC game producers make a different decision: We want as many people as possible to play our game. Some will pirate it and not pay us. We hope that many more will do the right thing and pay for it if they like it.
  - vy8vWJlco 15y ago
    Yep. Luckily the sky is rising! :) http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120129/17272817580/sky-is-rising-entertainment-industry-is-large-growing-not-shrinking.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120129/17272817580/sky-is...