Eric S. Raymond on GPL and BSD licenses. & Microsoft coming to Linux

Mike Parker aldacron at gmail.com
Sun Mar 29 18:42:45 PDT 2009


Yigal Chripun wrote:
> On 29/03/2009 08:26, Mike Parker wrote:
>> Yigal Chripun wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> How many companies do you know that use the BSD for their products?
>>> BSD is used by universities and non-profit organizations not companies.
>>> claiming that BSD > GPL in a corporate environment is simply wrong.
>>
>> That's not the point. Plenty of companies use open source libraries in
>> their code, even if they don't open source the end product. BSD is
>> friendlier to them because they aren't forced to open up everything that
>> touches it. GPL is viral. Use one GPL library and your whole project is
>> tainted. Philosophically, GPL gives freedom to the end user. BSD leaves
>> freedom with the developer. IMO, the latter is where it should be, as it
>> is the developer who expends the resources to create the product in the
>> first place.
> 
> you contradict yourself. if a company uses open source libraries in 
> their products than they are the *users* of the code, and the 
> *developers* are those who *created* the library. what you meant to say 
> is that many companies _exploit_ non free open source code (BSD and 
> such) in their closed source products. You do all the hard work, give 
> away your library for free, and those companies exploit that to enlarge 
> their profit margins, after all they invested much less time/money in 
> the product. if you really intended this outcome, you just robbed 
> someone's job at that same company.

No contradictions here. When someone releases a library under a more 
generous license like the BSD, they know full well that anyone can use 
that source in closed-source, proprietary software. Companies who do so 
are not *exploiting* anyone or anything. They are given permission by 
the developers of the library, who consciously made that choice, to do so.
> 
> The GPL gives freedom to both the developers and the end-users while the 
> BSD doesn't give any freedoms at all, to no one. That is why there are 
> many successful companies that base their business model on free 
> licenses like the GPL and zero companies that use the BSD. and that is 
> the point.

No, it gives no freedom to developers at all. Using any GPL code in your
project /forces/ you to open your source. It takes the decision of
whether to open or not out of your hands and puts it in the hands of
whomever created the GPLed product you use. That's why you won't find
bindings for any GPL libraries in Derelict, because then Derelict and
any project that uses it would have to be GPL. You call that freedom?

I think the GPL is a great choice for executables, particularly those 
that were formerly closed. For example, id software uses the GPL when 
opening their older games. For libraries, though, it severely limits the 
user base. I would never release a library under the GPL, because I 
don't want to restrict anyone in using it. As a library developer, I 
don't care what the end product is, or who the end users are. All I care 
about are those using my product. They are the ones I want to whom I 
want to give the freedom of choice.



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list