Reply to post: I have a better remedy...

From here on, Red Hat's new GPLv2 software projects will have GPLv3 cure for license violators

bombastic bob Silver badge

I have a better remedy...

I have a better remedy. Make it all BSD 3 or 4 clause and be done with it. No 'remediation' needed.

If you TRULY want to contribute, that's what you'll do. Otherwise, you're trying to control too much on how people use it.

I don't like [L]GPLv3 for many reasons, starting with the lengthy lawyerspeak and WAY too many implied and explicit restrictions, particularly for commercial use, with terms like "aggregate" being applied to GPLv3 licensing where one GPL component may or may not force "the entire work" to be GPLv3, basically MAKING ROOM for L[aw]YERS to sue/settle and get paid at YOUR expense. [L]GPLV2 is much cleaner, simpler, common sense, etc. and I tend to 'dual license' everything I put online anyway, such that either BSD or [L]GPLv2 license applies at the discretion of the person using it.

It's not like I won't get credit for writing those things anyway, with a non-GPL license. I just prefer freedom over "copy-left" and Stallman's anti-capitalist attitude as reflected in the licenses. If you restrict what people do with it, it's not "freedom" any more. "You're free to play with my toys, but you have to make a bzzzzz sound when making the airplane 'fly'" <-- like that

(understandably, Linux is GPLv2 but you can run proprietary binary-only stuff on it if you want to. RH could simply ship it separately as an add-on if they wanted to)

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021