4 ms·

In a corporate context, is there any risk or downside associated with making a specific contribution to GPL code which doesn't also apply to MIT/BSD? The only

In a corporate context, is there any risk or downside associated with making a specific contribution to GPL code which doesn't also apply to MIT/BSD? The only downside I can perhaps think of is a strategic one: endorsing the use of GPL in general and contributing to a healthy copyleft ecosystem, which may be disadvantageous to a giant corporate like Google.

rakoo 3y ago
If you make a contribution to GPL, the entirety of your contribution must be GPL. If you're using some internal library, you must make your library GPL. If your library is GPL, anything that depends on it must be GPL. For-profit companies don't like sharing and making the community better if it doesn't make them 10x richer, so they don't like GPL.
- oneshtein 3y ago
  > If you're using some internal library, you must make your library GPL. Not true at all. You cannot alter license of a library at all if you are not the author. You can select or change license for your own code only.
  - rakoo 3y ago
    I was talking about an internal library as in "a library developed inside My Company that is not made public"; as someone working for My Company, you'd have the responsibility to change the license of said library. Of course if you're using a library you're not an author of, the library must already be compatible otherwise you just can't use it.
- anonymous_sorry 3y ago
  You can define what your contribution is, right? You can publish any code you like under GPL, with zero further commitments as far as I'm aware. It doesn't have to be working software, it doesn't all have to be licenced the same. The copyright is still yours and you can do what you like. You can sell the software. You can enhance it and keep the enhancements proprietary and secret. You can use and sell the enhanced software without providing source code The only obligations come if a company (or individual) accepts GPL contributions from outside, because they don't own the full copyright any more and have to obide by the licence of the code they accepted from outside.
oneshtein 3y ago
Yes, there is risk to contribute back to opensource project in form of bug fixes or code updates.
goodpoint 3y ago
For a smaller company, [A]GPL would provide only upsides, especially in terms of protections against freeloaders, and that's why companies are using it.

rakoo 3y ago

If you make a contribution to GPL, the entirety of your contribution must be GPL. If you're using some internal library, you must make your library GPL. If your library is GPL, anything that depends on it must be GPL. For-profit companies don't like sharing and making the community better if it doesn't make them 10x richer, so they don't like GPL.

oneshtein 3y ago
> If you're using some internal library, you must make your library GPL. Not true at all. You cannot alter license of a library at all if you are not the author. You can select or change license for your own code only.
- rakoo 3y ago
  I was talking about an internal library as in "a library developed inside My Company that is not made public"; as someone working for My Company, you'd have the responsibility to change the license of said library. Of course if you're using a library you're not an author of, the library must already be compatible otherwise you just can't use it.
anonymous_sorry 3y ago
You can define what your contribution is, right? You can publish any code you like under GPL, with zero further commitments as far as I'm aware. It doesn't have to be working software, it doesn't all have to be licenced the same. The copyright is still yours and you can do what you like. You can sell the software. You can enhance it and keep the enhancements proprietary and secret. You can use and sell the enhanced software without providing source code The only obligations come if a company (or individual) accepts GPL contributions from outside, because they don't own the full copyright any more and have to obide by the licence of the code they accepted from outside.

oneshtein 3y ago

Yes, there is risk to contribute back to opensource project in form of bug fixes or code updates.

goodpoint 3y ago

For a smaller company, [A]GPL would provide only upsides, especially in terms of protections against freeloaders, and that's why companies are using it.