Open source licenses general.
What licenses do you prefer?
What do you Jow Forumsuys think about the gpl3?
Is it legal to link against a GPL library and not distribute the source?
Open source licenses
Elijah Martinez
Other urls found in this thread:
freebsd.org
lwn.net
twitter.com
Gabriel Torres
>>Is it legal to link against a GPL library and not distribute the source?
Nope, if its GPL and you link against it, you have to distribute the whole thing as GPL, source included. Well, if you choose to distribute, the GPL imposes no obligations on you if you don't.
Yeah, in an ideal world we wouldn't need the GPL, because in an ideal world "intellectual property" would be regarded as the oxymoron that it is. People would just distribute source because there'd be no reason not to. Of course we don't live in a world that's anywhere close to ideal. The GPL is kind of a hack, but as it stands it's a necessary one.
Nathaniel Kelly
Use BSD licenses like a real man.
Austin Moore
GPL is communism. BSD is the thinking man's choice.
Elijah Myers
All Open Source is Pinko Commie Libtard Yuropoor Coastal Hippie Homosexual Jew propaganda. Come the day of the rope so called free software advocates will be strung up with the non-whites and gays.
Joseph Peterson
How much of the work made in the PlayStation 4 Operating System was returned to FreeBSD?
Connor Gutierrez
You should be able to do it if you link it dynamically, your code and the GPL code are completely separate, therefore you didn't change anything in the GPL source.
Joshua Wood
Why should people have the "right" to deny rights to others? The only restrictions that the GPL imposes on you over and above permissive licenses prevent you from doing something you shouldn't be allowed to do in the first place - make the code nonfree.
Dylan Miller
Then everything should be free? Books, movies, games, etc? What separates software, that you took time to write from any other type of digital data?
Cooper Martinez
It was already established in the early 2000s that GPL is actually harmful to open source, I'm amazed people still buy into the GPL meme
Linus should have manned up years ago and release Linux under BSD or Apache licenses
Liam Lopez
Please for the love of all that is saint
delete this fucking thread. You aren't getting any discussion other than retards calling each others commies.
Oliver Jones
for books/movies usually is on GNU FDL
Joseph Adams
>What separates software, that you took time to write from any other type of digital data?
Nothing. See >in an ideal world "intellectual property" would be regarded as the oxymoron that it is.
In other words, yes, property rights should exist only in the realm of tangible objects, land, etc. Things that you can't copy. A book is property. The words it contains aren't. Or at least, shouldn't be. But since we have this ridiculous system in place, we have to turn it around and use it to enforce the freedom that should exist by default.
Jayden Myers
Yeah, the main advantage of bsd licensed code is that I can freely copy the code and lock up in any other license I want.
Jonathan Torres
They contributed back, but it wouldn't have mattered if they used a GPL-based operating system either.
I'm pretty sure that the whole Playstation APIs and interfaces are completely proprietary, so it wouldn't matter what kernel they used anyways, they likely used FreeBSD because of its performace, stability and scalability, which are the same reasons why companies like Netflix prefer FreeBSD.
Luke Powell
LOL just realized that even Netflix using FreeBSD you can't watch anything from there using FreeBSD.
>they likely used FreeBSD because of its performace, stability and scalability
They used it solely because of the license and you know that.
Alexander Reyes
>everything should be free
You completely centered the point
>muh red scare
Benjamin Sullivan
>LOL just realized that even Netflix using FreeBSD you can't watch anything from there using FreeBSD.
And? FreeBSD is refusing to implement DRM in their browsers, if you want DRM, use another operating system that doesn't care about your freedom.
>>they likely used FreeBSD because of its performace, stability and scalability
>They used it solely because of the license and you know that.
No I don't know that.
SteamOS is the living proof of that, they can make every piece of their software and games proprietary yet keep respecting the GPL. Because a fucking Playstation (like a Steam machine) doesn't require a lot of kernel-level modifications. (unless they want to implement some drivers for their controllers/similar hardware, which they are probably implementing as a proprietary kernel module (similar to Nvidia on Linux)).
Jordan Watson
ISC
Blake Rogers
GPLv3 attempts to solve the issue with the hardware being locked down. And yes Linus is a fool for not supporting it.
The issue of all the rest of the programs being proprietary is still there, but I do not believe that is solvable with just a license.
James Price
>yes Linus is a fool for not supporting it
Planned obsolescence is very important to hardware makers, they wouldn't have used Linux if it didn't let them abuse their customers.
Cameron Moore
You say that like it's a bad thing
Robert Martinez
At least we get the source code this way. If we scare them off with gplv3, we'll just get more fully closed botnets based on *BSD.
Sebastian Green
But we don't, kernel developers gave in long ago and condoned proprietary drivers even though that should be a GPLv2 violation
Colton King
Forgot about that, you are right they just put the botnet behind a module. Anyway this might be relevant.
>They HAVE resulted in more than one company exiting Linux development entirely and switching to non-Linux operating systems for their embedded products, and they're a big part of the reason behind Android's "No GPL in userspace" policy. (Which is Google, not Sony.)
lwn.net
Grayson Richardson
I am disappointed that he thought anything else would happen. If you use ANY license you have to be willing to eject people who don't comply. That is the whole point of a license. This applies to BSD/MIT license too. Public domain is the only option for those who truly want to claim they are against this, the only thing you have to worry about there is your local government arresting people and removing them from the public.
Grayson Clark
>"Although about 3 million computers get sold every year in China, people don't pay for the software. Someday they will, though," Gates told an audience at the University of Washington. "And as long as they're going to steal it, we want them to steal ours. They'll get sort of addicted, and then we'll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade."
Maybe they are thinking like Microsoft.