Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 21st Apr 2012 19:25 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source "A new analysis of licensing data shows that not only is use of the GPL and other copyleft licenses continuing to decline, but the rate of disuse is actually accelerating." This shouldn't be surprising. The GPL is complex, and I honestly don't blame both individuals and companies opting for simpler, more straightforward licenses like BSD or MIT-like licenses.
Permalink for comment 515209
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: hm?
by Valhalla on Sun 22nd Apr 2012 12:14 UTC in reply to "RE: hm?"
Member since:

the problem with GPL is V3 which is as anti-business as RMS could possibly make it.

Please point out how GPLv3 is extremely 'anti-business' as opposed to GPLv2? The major changes to GPLv3 was that it strenghtened the patent protection and prevented tivo-ization, the latter is the one which Linus strongly objected too and the one thing which could be concieved as anti-business, however that only apply to tivo-style business (not allowing the end user to run their own versions of software on a system).

Both these major changes were perfectly in line with what GPL stands for, which is the right to recieve, modify and run the modified code.

But RMS is gonna find out that its businesses paying for FOSS and when they won't touch it with a 50 foot pole?

GCC is GPLv3 licenced and has tons of corporate support, IBM, Red Hat, Google, etc are employing programmers to work fulltime on GCC, and corporations like Intel, AMD, continously contribute code.

Reply Parent Score: 5