7 ms·
I think it's just the GPL family of licenses that tend tend to cause most problems. I appreciate their intent, but the outcome often leaves a lot to be desired.
by spoiler 7mo ago
I think it's just the GPL family of licenses that tend tend to cause most problems. I appreciate their intent, but the outcome often leaves a lot to be desired.
- vova_hn2 7mo agoI like to think about GPL as a kind of an artistic performance and an elaborate critique of the whole concept of copyright. Like, "we don't like copyright, but since you insist on enforcing it and we can't do anything against it, we will invent a clever way to use your own rules against you".
- jonathanstrange 7mo agoThat is not really the motivation behind GPL licenses. These licenses have been designed to ensure by legal means that anyone can learn from the source code of software, fix bugs on their own, and modify the software to their needs.
- joquarky 7mo agoWe've surpassed the need for this now.
- jonathanstrange 7mo agoIt doesn't matter whether the AI or a human learns from the software, the source code for the learning must come from somewhere.
- Orygin 7mo agoWtf are these comments? A LGPL licensed project, guaranteed to be free and open source, being LLM-washed to a permissive license, and GPL is the problem here? They are literally stealing from open source, but it's the original license that is the issue?
- spoiler 7mo agoThey have been maintaining the project for years. It's not like some Joe Random with ChatGPT randomly entered the scene
- nothrabannosir 7mo agoThe GPL exists for the benefit of end users, not developers. It being a chore for developers who want to deny their users the software freedoms is a feature, not a bug.
- red_admiral 7mo agoHow does the GPL help a user who doesn't write code themselves?
- pocksuppet 7mo agoThey have the right to use the code, and they have the right to use improvements that someone else made, and they have the right to get someone to make improvements for them.
- mgulick 7mo agoThey also have the guarantee that the code licensed under the GPL, and all future enhancements to it, will remain free software. The same is not true of the MIT license's weak-copyleft.
- red_admiral 7mo agoAs far as I know, all the (L)GPL does is make sure that if A releases some code under it, then B can't release a non-free enhancement without A's permission. A can still do whatever they want, including sell ownership to B. Neither GPL nor MIT (or anything else) protects you against this. (EDIT) scenario: I make a browser extension and release v1 under GPL, it becomes popular and I sell it to an adtech company. They can do whatever they want with v2.
- nothrabannosir 7mo agoBy allowing them to benefit from the work of others who do. Directly or indirectly. I’m not good at car maintenance but I would benefit from an environment where schematics are open and cars are easy to maintain by everyone: there would be more knowledge around it, more garages for me to choose from, etc.
- orphea 7mo agoIf you have ill intentions or maybe you're a corporation that wants to use someone else's work for free without contributing anything back, then yes, I can see how GPL licenses "tend to cause problems".
- jonathanstrange 7mo agoWhy? What's your problem with them? They do exactly what they're supposed to do, to ensure that future derivatives of the source code have to be distributed under the same license and distribution respects fundamental freedoms.
- duskdozer 7mo agoIf the GPL causes you problems, then it's working as intended.
- cap11235 7mo agoAnd what exactly are some of these problems?