Re: licensing

Oops. Reply to all. It's getting late, sorry.

Taran

Taran Rampersad wrote:

> Simon deWeerdt wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 2003-10-19 at 16:10, Taran Rampersad wrote:
>>  
>>
>>> I fail to understand how offering the same code under 2 licenses is 
>>> beneficial. In fact, it's confusing. I could use the GPL'd code to 
>>> create a proprietary application that way, citing that I was using 
>>> the BSD license.
>>>
>>> If you're going to GPL the code, GPL the code. If you're going to 
>>> use the BSD license, use the BSD license. Please don't do both, it 
>>> has the potential to be a legal quagmire.
>>>   
>>
>>
>> I'm not a lawyer, but Perl, a widely used language in web applications
>> and other things is available this way.  I don't believe that making my
>> code available under BSD would change the licensing of any code I used,
>> in fact I might not be able to make any extensions of GPL code available
>> under BSD.  I would not advocate breaking licenses by making GPL stuff
>> available under BSD.
>>
> Whether advocated or not, it is a problem area.
>
>>
>> The way I see it is that advocates of GPL want to avoid having code lost
>> into proprietary applications.
>>
> I think it would be more fair to say that advocates of the GPL don't 
> feel the need to compete with their own code.
>
>>  I don't see that as a great concern
>> because all proprietary applications end up being supplanted by open
>> source ones sooner or later.
>>
> And by the continued permission of people using the BSD license, 
> proprietary companies will continue to use BSD-licensed code produced  
> under a proprietary license and the cycle will continue evermore. 
> Perhaps it's the people within the 'sweet spot' of this that advocate 
> BSD license usage. People often forget that Free Software/Open Source 
> developers need to eat (and strangely, most of these people seem to be 
> advocates of Open Source), and that software is a competitive market.
>
>>  Some of the proprietary apps may last a
>> long time but eventually they fall out of favour and are discarded. 
>> Some of that code then finds its way into openly shared resources.
>>
> Why wait? Just so proprietary licensed software can profit?
>
>> Its good/essential that some code is made GPL now but other things would
>> never be developed if there was no proprietary interest.  Most of us
>> programmers write code for proprietary applications.  Unfortunately GPL
>> cannot be included in those applications.  BSD allows the freedom to use
>> the code in other ways.  I think both licenses are good/essential.
>>
> For a programming library such as QT or wxWindows, I see where a 
> license such as a BSD license could be construed as positive. You use 
> the example of Perl, which fits. For an end user application, I do not 
> see this.
>
>>
>> I can make my code available under either license if I wish.  I don't
>> plan to make anyone else's GPL code available under BSD or BSD under
>> GPL.  This may not be the best solution for everyone but I think it
>> makes it widely usable by diverse interests.  The government needs can
>> be met by including a requirement for attribution and having the work
>> done by local developers.  Thats how I see it at any rate.
>>
> But you see, if you make the same code available under different 
> licenses, there is a potential problem especially with regard to end 
> user applications. Proprietary applications do not make their source 
> available; SCO is a blaring example of this. Then there is the issue 
> of Eolas which is
>
> But to drag this back onto topic: Why should the South African 
> government and it's citizens pay for software that can be used in a 
> competing proprietary application from another country? I fail to see 
> how that would benefit the people of South Africa. In fact, I would go 
> so far as to call it the theft of the South African people's 
> investment. With the GPL, the people of South Africa would derive 
> benefits from everyone else's modifications to the source code as 
> well. A negative effect versus a positive effect.
>
> My decision would be simple. GPL.
>
> Taran
>
>