Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 15th Jun 2007 22:17 UTC, submitted by prymitive
GNU, GPL, Open Source A lengthy debate that began with a suggestion to dual license the Linux kernel under the GPLv2 and the GPLv3 continues on the Linux Kernel Mailing List. Throughout the ongoing thread Linux creator Linus Torvalds has spoken out on the GPLv2, the upcoming GPLv3, the BSD license, Tivo, the Free Software Foundation, and much more. During the discussion, he was asked we he chose the GPLv2 over the BSD license when he's obviously not a big fan of the FSF.
Thread beginning with comment 248248
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: BSD vs GPL...
by Chreo on Sat 16th Jun 2007 00:14 UTC in reply to "BSD vs GPL..."
Chreo
Member since:
2005-07-06

...various wireless network drivers written for OpenBSD (easily the best wireless support in the open source world) have been ported ...

Best?! Well, not if you talk to OpenBSD developers, it isn't. Is WPA even supported? Yes, I know that OpenBSD people does not believe in encrypting Wireless stuff since they think VPN is the way to go. Apparently the rest of the people disagrees by their actions. While that works nicely when you are using you own setup, it gives you immense problems accessing other open access points.

On BSD, I find Linus strange. While he agrees that sharing is the way to go, he feels that he needs to tell people what to do by forcing them (through GPL). Luckily, people that believe in the BSD principle, share without restrictions, does not and the OS-world is a much better place than it would've been without BSD. I see no shortage of code merging into FreeBSD so obviously people act differently from what Linus fears. It is a bit like freedom of speech, it is the right to speak those words you disapprove of that needs to be protected, not the opinions you agree with. I believe in completely free and open software so I will defend your right to freely branch and modify it. I will of course encourage you to share the modifications but I will not force you to do so as it is your code (only the modifications, the original source is as free as before, an incredibly common misunderstanding by some "GPL-only" pundits). I do see a place for GPL software, but for me it is an extremely poor choice for an OS-license. Feel free to disagree

Edited 2007-06-16 00:17

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: BSD vs GPL...
by jgfenix on Sat 16th Jun 2007 00:29 in reply to "RE: BSD vs GPL..."
jgfenix Member since:
2006-05-25

I think that what Linus meant is that with the BSD license you can fork the code, distribute the software and keep the changes to yourself. With the GPL you would have to distribute your changes

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: BSD vs GPL...
by phoenix on Sat 16th Jun 2007 18:25 in reply to "RE[2]: BSD vs GPL..."
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

And what's the problem with that?

Pick the license that suits your needs.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: BSD vs GPL...
by sbergman27 on Sat 16th Jun 2007 01:02 in reply to "RE: BSD vs GPL..."
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"""
On BSD, I find Linus strange. While he agrees that sharing is the way to go, he feels that he needs to tell people what to do by forcing them (through GPL). Luckily, people that believe in the BSD principle, share without restrictions, does not and the OS-world is a much better place than it would've been without BSD.
"""

Linus is not strange about BSD. He feels that if one makes their hard work available for others to use, he has the right to expect "tit for tat".

I sometimes find Theo a bit strange about BSD because he gives people the freedom not to give back and moans when some choose not to.

But don't take that as a criticism of BSD. Because copyleft licenses have the nasty side effect of sucking up OSS code from other free projects without giving back.

"Compatibility" in the GPL world, means "we can take from them". Usually, they cannot take from us. But few people of the copyleft mentality seem to seem a problem with that.

In the insterest of full disclosure, I should say that I like copyleft. I even like the new extensions that come with the GPLv3. (Though, as always, I'm more concerned with the GPLv3's divisive aspects than I am with the refinements in it.)

But I do respect the BSD philosophy, even if I do sometimes call it the "rape me" license.

In the end, I think that we are stronger for having different classes of licenses available. And note that I say "classes of licenses". I do not think that rampant license fragmentation is good. But BSD and Copyleft represent two substantively different views of freedom. And I believe that we are stronger for having a choice at that level.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: BSD vs GPL...
by sean on Mon 18th Jun 2007 13:37 in reply to "RE[2]: BSD vs GPL..."
sean Member since:
2005-06-29

But I do respect the BSD philosophy, even if I do sometimes call it the "rape me" license.

A better way to think about it is the giving license. You give to others instead of expecting money or source code in return. You can still hope others will share back. That is not hypocritical. BSD is the soup kitchen of licenses. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 1