Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 1st Jun 2012 23:56 UTC, submitted by Modafinil
GNU, GPL, Open Source "The Samba Team and seven kernel hackers have come together with Software Freedom Conservancy to help efforts to ensure compliance with the GPL by those who implement Linux and other GPL software. Richard Hillesley talked to Bradley Kuhn of Software Freedom Conservancy, Jeremy Allison of Samba, and Matthew Garrett, who works in his spare time with the GPL Compliance Project for Linux Developers."
Permalink for comment 520492
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: What a waste of time....
by Valhalla on Sat 2nd Jun 2012 20:38 UTC in reply to "What a waste of time.... "
Member since:

Has SQLite suffered from being PD?

Has Linux, GCC, Git, Samba, Qemu, VirtualBox, FFmpeg, x264, Blender, MPlayer, Gimp, Inkscape etc etc suffered from being GPL licenced?

The existance of GPL has no bearing on it's how widespread it has become, it's people choosing to use it which made it the most used open source licence in the world.

Now if GPL hadn't existed then another similar licence would have since it obviously fills a need. If no one wanted to use GPL then it would have faded into obscurity like so many other licences which practically no one wants.

And before you attribute this to the 'viral' nature of the licence, realise that in order for this to have any impact there needs to be alot of code out there written and licenced as GPL which alot of people want to use and also that they find the licence terms acceptable.

At the end of the day it's a choice the coder makes for his/her code: 'under which terms will I allow someone else to use my code?'

Some people say to use my code you give me cold hard cash, some say to use my code you must publish any code you distribute it with, some say to use my code you must publish any changes made to my code you distribute, some say to use my code you must keep the copyright attribution intact.

There is no right or wrong, there are simply preferences which in turn can (and I'd wager often does) change depending on the type of code in question.

Personally I think BSD/MIT style licences are the best choice for component/framework style code while GPL is best suited for large collaborative projects.

But that is just my preference. It's up to the creator/owner of the code to set the terms and I can choose to accept them or simply walk away.

Obviously alot of people find the GPL licence acceptable as it is so widespread in use and also alot of people sees it as their licence of choice as so many licence their non-derivative code as GPL.

Most important of all, IMO - **learn** from it, and you don't need to worry about then including what you have learned in your own software.

You can learn from GPL/BSD/MIT source code aswell, just not copy it verbatim.

Reply Parent Score: 5