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.
Thread beginning with comment 515157
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: hm?
by Soulbender on Sun 22nd Apr 2012 02:22 UTC in reply to "hm?"
Soulbender
Member since:
2005-08-18

The GPL is complex, therefore BSD is better?


Simpler is often better.

VHS vs Beta, is one example everyone seems to know.
Windows vs Linux, is another I`d like to cite.


This really has absolutely nothing to do with this.

Why this refusal to go completely opensource


Some say that the BSD/MIT license is more open than the GPL. Who does so many GPL project refuse to go completely open?

If you release a project under the BSD, spent 10 years on it, and some dude just incorporates his proprietary thing into it, and makes a lot of money, don`t you feel some kind of injustice? There you are not getting any of that money, and they guy who only had the skill for his proprietary tweaks gets it all.


You do know that the GPL does not prevent this from happening either, right?

Then again the BSD logo is a satan. I am sure all satans are proud to be abused.


a) "the BSD logo" is not satan. b) are you trying to be funny?

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: hm?
by JAlexoid on Mon 23rd Apr 2012 12:34 in reply to "RE: hm?"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Simpler is often better.

When it comes to legally binding agreements, then it's mostly not the case.

Reply Parent Score: 2