Conversation

Replying to

@DanielMicay

@awakecoding

and 3 others

You are only "restricted" from making the software proprietary (i.e., not give others the permissions you were given).

Quote Tweet

Matt 'msw' Wilson

@_msw_

Aug 28, 2021

Replying to @wewegomb and @alyssarzg

The GPL is completely business friendly, so long as business objectives are compatible with Free Software objectives. The GPL has created virtually impossible-to-measure business value by unencumbering businesses, as software users, from the restrictions of proprietary licensing.

Replying to

It also restricts mixing it with lots of other open source software, prevents selling devices with an immutable root of trust even as an optional variant of a product, etc. It has a ton of usage restrictions. The users of source code are developers and that's who it restricts.

Replying to

I think there are many ways to meet various design requirements of consumer electronics devices while still respecting the rights that I think the other of the device should be given.

Replying to

Daniel hits on a key aspect that always bothered me: who the real "users" are. The GPL doesn't affect me as an end user, but it does affect me significantly as a developer, especially if my intent is to potentially create proprietary software products.

Hurricane Ian McKellar

Replying to

How does the GPL stop you from creating proprietary software products? You can license proprietary equivalents of GPL software for any components you need. If you can't afford to do that then you have a business problem not a license problem.

Replying to

You misunderstood me - while technically possible, the ability to incorporate GPL software into proprietary software products is severely restricted. And yes, having to use out-of-process extensions to avoid the GPL propagation to proprietary code is limiting.

Hurricane Ian McKellar

Replying to

Maybe you misunderstand me. You have choices. You can choose to build products out of GPL software and comply with it's licenses or choose to build products out of proprietary software and comply with it's licenses.

Replying to

GPL restricts usage and is a close cousin of those non-commercial licenses. Permissive licenses do exist. Complying with licenses is itself a choice. GPL violation is the software equivalent of pirating a movie. Many people choose not to respect software licenses anyway.

Hurricane Ian McKellar

Replying to

GPL doesn't restrict usage, just distribution. You can do whatever you want with GPL software including incorporating it into a new program. You just can't share it with someone else unless you give them the same rights to the whole program. Everything else is fud.

Replying to

That doesn't make any sense. Distribution is part of using the software. There's no use for the source code without software developers. None of this convoluted reasoning makes any sense. I see all this exactly the same way as a Jehovah's Witness evangelizing to me.

Replying to

I write/ support real free software without restrictions on usage which means you can build whatever you want, however you want, and the developers haven't tried to enforce rules beyond minimal attribution requirements. Free software doesn't have license incompatibilities.

2:31 AM · Oct 11, 2021Twitter Web App