3 ms·
> the GPL is useful when you want to ensure that people don't take your work and profit from it. Huh? Are you saying you can't make a profit from gpl-ed code?
by geon 12y ago
> the GPL is useful when you want to ensure that people don't take your work and profit from it.
Huh? Are you saying you can't make a profit from gpl-ed code? Then why was it written to begin with? If company A can profit from it, then so can company B.
As far as licenses are concerned anyway. Time to market and network effects are probably much more important.
- wmf 12y agoThe author of GPL code can (try to) profit via proprietary dual licensing, but others cannot. http://producingoss.com/en/dual-licensing.html http://producingoss.com/en/dual-licensing.html
- new299 12y ago> Huh? Are you saying you can't make a profit from gpl-ed code? Then why was it written to begin with? If company A can profit from it, then so can company B. I think selling GPL'd software is a difficult proposition yes. I don't think I know of any of any GPL projects which are sold for profit (unless there's some other value-add, in which case they are selling the value-add not the GPL'd software). > As far as licenses are concerned anyway. Time to market and network effects are probably much more important. In a limited view of software where you're only talking about websites you're possibly correct...
- kevinnk 12y agoThere are plenty of dual licensed codebases that make a profit with no additional value add (other than not having to respect the GPL.) For example, the popular C++ gui framework JUICE[1] [1] http://www.juce.com/faq#t78n75645 http://www.juce.com/faq#t78n75645
- 72deluxe 12y agoI cannot take any GPL code and put it into a product and sell the product without releasing the source. As the source would have to be available, people could take the source and compile the software and then wouldn't have to pay me, so I could never make a profit. It's why GPL and LGPL code is best (totally?) avoided in commercial closed-source products.