3 ms·
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html it isn't that bad to get through. There are also more than enough analysis of
by jimktrains2 13y ago
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html it isn't that bad to get through. There are also more than enough analysis of it on the web from reputable sources (I'm looking for good links...).
If you understand copyleft, then you know what you're giving up by not using a copyleft, license. Do you not care about what you gain from the copyleft or don't want what you gain?
- Sanddancer 13y agoI care about what I lose because of copylefting software. I want software to suck less, and if that occasionally means letting someone be a free-rider on my stuff, let it be. At the same time, the existence of the GPL doesn't preclude people from free-riding either. Look at the embedded toolchains that are little more than GCC with a tiny proprietary wrapper, or the many many companies that use GPLed code, and have internal patches that never see light outside of the company. Restrictive licenses like the GPL are not all sunshine and roses.
- eliteraspberrie 13y agoI think most people outside of technology wouldn't easily understand copyleft, and a day might come when I depend on those people. So it's a trade-off between my rights, users' rights, and my peace of mind. The rights I give up, by choosing BSD rather than GPL, I don't think I could enforce without losing my peace of mind.