3 ms·
> Why is that a problem? Because that has the risk to move the world away from open source and more towards closed source.
by tgsovlerkhgsel 3y ago
> Why is that a problem?
Because that has the risk to move the world away from open source and more towards closed source.
- elteto 3y agoWithout GPL enforcement you end up with closed source too: they take it, modify it, and don’t distribute their changes. Fuck them. If they want to get freebies then they have to share. If not they are welcome to write their own from scratch.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 3y agoIn the case of e.g. the Linux kernel, many contribute back because maintaining a private fork is unsustainable.
- wizzwizz4 3y agoI can't think of any other example than the Linux kernel; and even then, plenty of people neglect to mainline their drivers.
- dagmx 3y agoBlender receives lots of corporate development. GCC as well up till when clang arrived.
- wizzwizz4 3y agoI've seen people maintain their own, incompatible forks of both of those, sometimes for quite a long time. No company maintains a fork of the entire Linux kernel in private: the closest thing is RHEL's additional hardware support, but that's basically just drivers.
- dagmx 3y agoImho they’d just move to permissive licenses like Apache 2.0. Corporations aren’t necessarily opposed to open source, as long as 1. It benefits them 2. The terms are very clear cut 3. The failure mode protects their IP The various GPL licenses fail the latter two points.