Voice of the Masses: Do you care about FOSS licenses?
Obviously we all care about free and open source software – GNU/Linux and the incredibly rich variety of software we use wouldn’t exist without it. But just how important are the differences between licenses to you? Are you very passionate about the GPL vs BSD debate, or have you found another license that you think is the ultimate solution for FOSS? Do you think we should pay more attention to these matters?
Or conversely, do you think it’s all a side issue, a personal choice for developers, and the most important aspect is that the licenses adhere to the open source definition? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below, and we’ll read out the best in our upcoming podcast!
Related Posts
About The Author
Mike Saunders
Mike stores his data by printing out hex dumps and laminating the sheets. He's the author of The Haynes Linux Manual and the creator of MikeOS, an operating system hand-built from assembly language.
when i see proprietary licence listed beside a bit of software for a task, i tend to look for a gpl equivent. i don’t specifically seek a gpl or a specific version of gpl (version 3), but i do look for a foss licence. it’s my /guarantee/ that the software will be around in 5 years and won’t make stupid changes… usually… 😛
I have a dislike for BSD or BSD-like licences as I have come across proprietary software that has taken BSD software and added “greatness” (like Keon with openssh). With that I can’t see what they have added or broken.
Too much BSD software has been taken without anything going back hence by dislike of this.
What is important to *you?* Is your only concern getting acknowledged as they guy behind SuperThing? Choose CC-BY or BSD-style. Making sure the software remains open source? (A)GPL. Selling out to MegaCorp™? BSD, because they believe they sell software. Selling out to NewCorp? GPL, because they know they sell services, and treat software as a commodity.
I used to prefer GPL for my own code but I’ve switched to BSD. When I release something I don’t really mind who uses it but if I ever did write something awesome I’d like it to be used by as many people as possible. If they don’t want to provide any changes back that’s up to them.
In a somewhat related matter, I was actually looking for some CC music by Professor Kilq and noticed that he has released it as CC BY-NC-SA which is a bit annoying because I wanted to use it in a YouTube video which would fall foul of the terms (by the way, I recommend his stuff – https://soundcloud.com/professorkliq/sets/the-scientific-method-vol-ii – thanks #LinuxOutlaws :sadface: )
Oops, was meant to be this – https://soundcloud.com/professorkliq/elephantitis?in=professorkliq/sets/guns-blazin
I just read a comment by Linus Torvalds explaining that the decision to use GPL was the most important part of developing Linux.
“The GPL ensures that nobody is ever going to take advantage of your code. It will remain free and nobody can take that away from you. I think that’s a big deal for community management.”
I think so too, and that is why I think the GPL is the best license possible, and I am passionate about that.
I’ve used to think any-OSI-Approved-Licenses-is-fine until I saw this one https://youtu.be/5mnHebVSUb0
No, but thanks for asking. Cheers.
I do care quite a lot. I would not personally release any software with any other license than the GPL. That way no one can proprierarize my work and take advantage of it without supporting the wider free software community and my work.
I don’t think proprietary software companies understand that the GPL actually would protect their work in a far better way than closing the code. In a world where we don’t actually want to pay for the software, but for the services around it and maybe for packaging of the software, these kinds of proprietary dinosaurs will hopefully either change or disappear.
I do get annoyed with companies that refuse to use GPL type of licenses saying that they might be forced to release their code if they do. This is really not about how valuable and important their code is but really about how crappy their code is and that would then have to explain to the masses this crappy code.
Only when code is out there and available to be reviewed by anyone, will good code be produced. Otherwise if it works it is good enough to ship.
FOSS licensing is like religious belief. There are those who are agnostic and those that are zealots, those that are fundamentalists and those that are modernists. Ultimately, like a religion, while they may be a path to achieving personal enlightenment and generally be good for humanity, they can also be reinterpreted to service a person’s or an institution’s own commercial or political needs. While FOSS represents an unselfish contribution, it is noble; when there is radicalisation, it is detracts from the glory of our
…insert Stallman,Torvalds, or other deity here…
Of course I care. Whether I understand the important distinctions between each of them is another matter.
I just use software as long as it works. Normally they have a free licence but, occasionally, to get something working you need something proprietary to get the job done. I then look around for something free or change the hardware, like my old scanner which wouldn’t work with Sane.
I have no feelings one way or the other about the apathy of the common carefree consumers of FOSS. It is important primarily because an obligation towards freedom is in itself a restriction of freedom. FOSS is a gift with attached T&Cs, designed to protect the giver and the recipients. Should one be selective about which license the software is based on? Unfortunately while we have a choice, being picky restricts that choice, and one either compromises and accepts diversity or copes with inconvenience.
There is a point in having an opinion and not making a fuss over it. I value GPL, but I use proprietary drivers for my graphics card. Do I get upset when i see companies violate GPL? yes. Am I going to feed a bunch of lawyers lots of money to fight a battle that will drag on for years? That is just a pointless waste of money. Those fights should be led by an empowered developer community, with balanced representation from the community, FOSS and commercial entities, making common sense judgments, rather than a bunch of overpaid, filibustering, non-cognoscenti lawyers
I don’t care about FOSS licenses at all which is why I’m very grateful for those that do.
If we could do away with licensing and patents altogether the world would be a much saner, peaceful and equitable place
I believe that copyleft licenses (and especially things like the AGPL in our modern “something-as-a-Service”-World) are the only way to ultimately ensure our software and computer usage freedom.
Having said that, I am guilty of going the easy path and using Open Source or even proprietary software too and therefore driving their demand up 🙁
It is the slippery slope where (big) companies push for “free” (as in beer) so they can do whatever the hell they want with the stuff other people created and the real free (as in libre) things (programs, protocols, etc.) might have a hard time catching on or being used because then others would need to play nice, too…
I think that the argument of “I don’t care what you do with it, have fun!” seems more altruistic at the moment but I strongly believe that in the long run, the greater good for future generations can only be achieved by making sure that great improvements are not silo’ed away to rott in someone’s proprietary system, never to be seen again in 10-20 years or so (when some machines capable of running such software might still be alive and perfectly acceptable to use but the companies hording the software have long died and their repositories with them so not even security fixes can be applied anymore).
I think there needs to be a shift to changes on how developers are being compensated for their work, e.g. micro-payments on a global scale, more cultural/governmental subsidizing, etc. … it will take a lot of time to bring about this change, but thank you for prompting me to think and write about this today!
Cheers,
Georg
PS: I’m not sure if you have any influence over it, but thank you for having an ‘old school’, legible and sane CAPTCHA!
—
CAPTCHA: BUSWAY
I have to confess that the license isn’t the first thing I look at when I install and get cozy with a new piece of software. But eventually if I see a “libre” version going I’ll suffer shortcomings to switch to it. As for the differences between licenses, I don’t look that deeply. BSD, GPL, I’m just happy it’s not proprietary!