The complexity is a feature. Simply put: if you want to work in the open, noncommercially, with maximal sharing, use something other than GPL. If you ever inten

The complexity is a feature. Simply put: if you want to work in the open, noncommercially, with maximal sharing, use something other than GPL. If you ever intend to commercialize your work, use GPL. I disagree. All of my work is under the GPL, not out of any concern with commercial use, but to ensure that any users have the same rights to the code as I do. The complexity of the GPL is undesirable and unwanted, though currently necessary. I used to use the BSD license for my personal projects, under the reasoning that having the source "somewhere out there" would be enough. Then somebody modified my work and passed it on to users without the source. It was a very minor project, and there was no legitimate reason why he couldn't have provided the modified source to his users. After he stopped supporting it, the whole mess was dumped in my lap, with several miserable people wondering why I couldn't help support their "BSD-licensed" software. The fundamental difference between the BSD/MIT and GPL modes of thought is in whose rights are more important, the developer or the user.