Again: list of advantages of the xGPL

At 04:14 PM 6/12/02 -0500, Sean C. Farley wrote:

>The only advantage I have seen for the GPL over the BSDL is for
>companies wanting to be able to sell proprietary versions of the code
>while making all of the "free" software people happy.
>
>For unbridled open-source projects, I have not seen any help from the
>GPL.

Ok, here is a small list:
Advantages of the xGPL in comparison with the BSDL:

1) Create a good atmosphere of trust on projects. Everyone is happy sharing 
because he knows that all modifications will flow

back. No trading takes place which could slow down the project and generate 
loss of time and trust.

2) Prevent embrace and extend tactics. Imagine Linux being under X11. I 
wouldn't feel comfortable thinking about the

possibility of M$ using this tactic. They certainly have the cash to afford 
making their own fork, think about what happened

with the Kerberos protocol.

3) Code development will no longer be halted on the hope for future 
releases of proprietary code. Think about DirectX.

4) With the BSDL people lose interest in coding if some functionality is 
already implemented by a proprietary fork. Think about Marcus

losing interest in game support for Wine. No one wants to reinvent the wheel.

5) Increase the amount of available free software. I think some companies 
will start using/improving xGPL software when the

cost of reimplementing it is too high.

Quoting from:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/pragmatic.html

<quote>
Consider GNU C++.  Why do we have a free C++ compiler?  Only because
the GNU GPL said it had to be free.  GNU C++ was

developed by an
industry consortium, MCC, starting from the GNU C compiler.  MCC
normally makes its work as proprietary as

can be.  But they made the
C++ front end free software, because the GNU GPL said that was the
only way they could release it.

The C++ front end included many new
files, but since they were meant to be linked with GCC, the GPL
did apply to them.  The

benefit to our community is evident.

Consider GNU Objective C.  NeXT initially wanted to make this front
end proprietary; they proposed to release it as .o

files,
and let users link them with the rest of GCC, thinking this might be a
way around the GPL's requirements.  But our

lawyer said that this
would not evade the requirements, that it was not allowed.  And so they 
made the Objective C front end

free software.
</quote>

6) In the case of bespoken software: If the developer uses a xGPL code as 
basis, changes MUST be returned. If the license was

X11 the hiring company could demand: Don't release the code back to the 
public. Ask the guys from CodeWeavers about their

experiences in this regard. This will also increase the amount of free 
software.

7) No more reinventing the wheel. With a BSDL you have the possibility of 
several private forks reimplementing the same

functionality because there is no enforcement to return the code.


Hope this helps, Roland