3 ms·

If he is going to use GPL, a licence with almost nil chance enforcement when violated, how naive is he when he so surprise that scummy people try and commercial

by verroq 14y ago

If he is going to use GPL, a licence with almost nil chance enforcement when violated, how naive is he when he so surprise that scummy people try and commercialise his software. If he cared about his software (which obviously he did) he should have just sold it himself. Honestly, I think he's just upset because of a lost business opportunity. On the flip side, your software is getting forked, used commercially with ??? amount of users, that'll look pretty nice on your resume.

mindcrime 14y ago
If he is going to use GPL, a licence with almost nil chance enforcement when violated, how naive is he when he so surprise that scummy people try and commercialise his software. There isn't necessarily anything "scummy" about commercialising F/OSS. I mean, do you think Red Hat are scummy for selling Linux?
- verroq 14y ago
  I assumed there were actual violations, which would make the perpetrators scummy.
  - mindcrime 14y ago
    Ah, OK. I thought you were implying that scumminess was a direct result of trying to commercialise F/OSS. My bad.
calpaterson 14y ago
The GPL has an excellent enforcement history. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Software_Foundation#GPL_enforcement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Software_Foundation#GPL_en... http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html
- verroq 14y ago
  Lets be realistic here, enforcement of copyright across nation boundaries is still difficult. Just look at the recent case where someone's game engine was cloned, translated and sold in China. Aside from some high profile targets, you cannot claim that GPL has an excellent enforcement history. A simple google query "gpl hall of shame" should suffice.
  - calpaterson 14y ago
    If you were originally trying to point out that all copyright enforcement outside of the West is poor (I doubt it) then you really should have made that clear. In China, the GPL brings no specific problems that rights-holders using other licences don't face. If someone is going to violate the law completely, it won't help if you've made them click through an EULA. I don't think this is really what anyone is talking about. Everyone has copyright problems in China, including Microsoft and Apple. A web search for "gpl hall of shame" brings up an FFMPEG page so out of date that they took it down and an extremely out of date Busybox page. It also brings up this: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2009/05/cisco-settles-fsf-gpl-lawsuit-appoints-compliance-officer/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2009/05/cisco-... Fact is, the GPL works great and has a great history of being enforceable with plenty of high profile cases.

by verroq 14y ago

mindcrime 14y ago

If he is going to use GPL, a licence with almost nil chance enforcement when violated, how naive is he when he so surprise that scummy people try and commercialise his software. There isn't necessarily anything "scummy" about commercialising F/OSS. I mean, do you think Red Hat are scummy for selling Linux?

verroq 14y ago
I assumed there were actual violations, which would make the perpetrators scummy.
- mindcrime 14y ago
  Ah, OK. I thought you were implying that scumminess was a direct result of trying to commercialise F/OSS. My bad.

calpaterson 14y ago

The GPL has an excellent enforcement history. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Software_Foundation#GPL_enforcement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Software_Foundation#GPL_en... http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html

verroq 14y ago
Lets be realistic here, enforcement of copyright across nation boundaries is still difficult. Just look at the recent case where someone's game engine was cloned, translated and sold in China. Aside from some high profile targets, you cannot claim that GPL has an excellent enforcement history. A simple google query "gpl hall of shame" should suffice.
- calpaterson 14y ago
  If you were originally trying to point out that all copyright enforcement outside of the West is poor (I doubt it) then you really should have made that clear. In China, the GPL brings no specific problems that rights-holders using other licences don't face. If someone is going to violate the law completely, it won't help if you've made them click through an EULA. I don't think this is really what anyone is talking about. Everyone has copyright problems in China, including Microsoft and Apple. A web search for "gpl hall of shame" brings up an FFMPEG page so out of date that they took it down and an extremely out of date Busybox page. It also brings up this: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2009/05/cisco-settles-fsf-gpl-lawsuit-appoints-compliance-officer/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2009/05/cisco-... Fact is, the GPL works great and has a great history of being enforceable with plenty of high profile cases.