4 ms·

>The GPL does, however, prevent a company from forking your software and releasing closed versions without getting you (the copyright holder) involved Which is

>The GPL does, however, prevent a company from forking your software and releasing closed versions without getting you (the copyright holder) involved Which is relevant how? Who was releasing closed versions of mongrel again? I know what the GPL does, that's the point. His blathering is entirely unrelated to licensing at all. He is saying "RoR was famous, and mongrel wasn't, and I don't like that", as a reason to use the GPL. Not only is that entirely nonsensical, but RoR is MIT licensed, so it wouldn't even make sense if you did hit your head and somehow think licensing determined whether or not your software was famous.

Surio 14y ago
>> Who was releasing closed versions of mongrel again? He is not saying there were closed versions being released. He simply wanted to point that people were using mongrel very blithely, but not crediting the hard-work, effort and innovation of Zed's work, (which they were using for their own monetary gain!). I don't think he was interested in "naming-and-shaming", flame-baiting, etc., (I suppose). >> He is saying "RoR was famous, and mongrel wasn't, and I don't like that", as a reason to use the GPL No. He's not saying that. Here's some paras where the mongrel and ruby discussion takes place. I'll leave it at that. Even though everyone was using my software, the vast majority of firms using Mongrel were startups. The last thing a startup wants to admit is that they don’t own their intellectual property. They want everyone, especially the VCs and investors, to believe that they’re all geniuses who “innovated” everything they run. When I looked around, companies had no problem admitting they used Ruby on Rails, hell that probably got them their funding. What I didn’t see was them saying they used anything else, which meant that when I would try to get work, it was impossible for me to explain the magnitude of Mongrel’s impact. To them it was just some simple web server that their system administrator had to use After Mongrel I almost need companies to have to admit they use my software. I would actually rather nobody use my software than be in a situation where everyone is using my gear and nobody is admitting it. Or worse, everyone is using it, and at the same time saying I can’t code.
- gizzlon 14y ago
  The title is "Why I GPL", so one would expect the stuff in the article to explain why he's using GPL. But I agree with GP, much of it does not. To be clear, Zed Shaw creates a lot of cools stuff, and if it was up to me I would hire him in a second :) But that doesn't make this piece any good.. > Even though everyone was using my software, the vast majority of firms using Mongrel were startups GPL is not going to fix that, it might actually make it worse as many companies don't like the GPL > The last thing a startup wants to admit is that they don’t own their intellectual property Maybe, but GPL is not going to fix that > They want everyone, especially the VCs and investors, to believe that they’re all geniuses who “innovated” everything they run GPL is not going to fix that > When I looked around, companies had no problem admitting they used Ruby on Rails, hell that probably got them their funding GPL is not going to change that > What I didn’t see was them saying they used anything else, which meant that when I would try to get work, it was impossible for me to explain the magnitude of Mongrel’s impact GPL is not going to change that, as you can still use it without telling anyone.. > To them it was just some simple web server that their system administrator had to use GPL is not going to fix that > After Mongrel I almost need companies to have to admit they use my software GPL is not going to fix that > I would actually rather nobody use my software than be in a situation where everyone is using my gear and nobody is admitting it GPL could make this worse, but probably not. > Or worse, everyone is using it, and at the same time saying I can’t code What? who's saying that? :'( Honestly, it looks like Zed should hook up with someone that could help him monetize his awesome work.
- papsosouid 14y ago
  Nothing you said even addresses my point. The entire pile of blathering nonsense about mongrel and RoR has literally nothing to do with licensing. The article is about why he uses the GPL now. He uses mongrel as an example, despite the fact that nothing he says about mongrel even tangentially relates to licensing in any way. Read the paragraphs you quoted. Which one of them is a reason to use the GPL? The answer (quite obviously) is none of them, which is my point.

Surio 14y ago

>> Who was releasing closed versions of mongrel again? He is not saying there were closed versions being released. He simply wanted to point that people were using mongrel very blithely, but not crediting the hard-work, effort and innovation of Zed's work, (which they were using for their own monetary gain!). I don't think he was interested in "naming-and-shaming", flame-baiting, etc., (I suppose). >> He is saying "RoR was famous, and mongrel wasn't, and I don't like that", as a reason to use the GPL No. He's not saying that. Here's some paras where the mongrel and ruby discussion takes place. I'll leave it at that. Even though everyone was using my software, the vast majority of firms using Mongrel were startups. The last thing a startup wants to admit is that they don’t own their intellectual property. They want everyone, especially the VCs and investors, to believe that they’re all geniuses who “innovated” everything they run. When I looked around, companies had no problem admitting they used Ruby on Rails, hell that probably got them their funding. What I didn’t see was them saying they used anything else, which meant that when I would try to get work, it was impossible for me to explain the magnitude of Mongrel’s impact. To them it was just some simple web server that their system administrator had to use After Mongrel I almost need companies to have to admit they use my software. I would actually rather nobody use my software than be in a situation where everyone is using my gear and nobody is admitting it. Or worse, everyone is using it, and at the same time saying I can’t code.

gizzlon 14y ago
The title is "Why I GPL", so one would expect the stuff in the article to explain why he's using GPL. But I agree with GP, much of it does not. To be clear, Zed Shaw creates a lot of cools stuff, and if it was up to me I would hire him in a second :) But that doesn't make this piece any good.. > Even though everyone was using my software, the vast majority of firms using Mongrel were startups GPL is not going to fix that, it might actually make it worse as many companies don't like the GPL > The last thing a startup wants to admit is that they don’t own their intellectual property Maybe, but GPL is not going to fix that > They want everyone, especially the VCs and investors, to believe that they’re all geniuses who “innovated” everything they run GPL is not going to fix that > When I looked around, companies had no problem admitting they used Ruby on Rails, hell that probably got them their funding GPL is not going to change that > What I didn’t see was them saying they used anything else, which meant that when I would try to get work, it was impossible for me to explain the magnitude of Mongrel’s impact GPL is not going to change that, as you can still use it without telling anyone.. > To them it was just some simple web server that their system administrator had to use GPL is not going to fix that > After Mongrel I almost need companies to have to admit they use my software GPL is not going to fix that > I would actually rather nobody use my software than be in a situation where everyone is using my gear and nobody is admitting it GPL could make this worse, but probably not. > Or worse, everyone is using it, and at the same time saying I can’t code What? who's saying that? :'( Honestly, it looks like Zed should hook up with someone that could help him monetize his awesome work.
papsosouid 14y ago
Nothing you said even addresses my point. The entire pile of blathering nonsense about mongrel and RoR has literally nothing to do with licensing. The article is about why he uses the GPL now. He uses mongrel as an example, despite the fact that nothing he says about mongrel even tangentially relates to licensing in any way. Read the paragraphs you quoted. Which one of them is a reason to use the GPL? The answer (quite obviously) is none of them, which is my point.