GPL vs. BSD

Explain to me why the GPL is evil, Sup Forums.

The GPL has saved code time and again from being sacked by corporations. The GPL gives you the possibility to defend yourself if someone takes your code without publishing their own. That is something that BSD does not provide - there are so many projects out there that use BSD code, and the programmers are not even given feedback about it. They are being ripped off while the FreeBSD-Foundation has to ask for donations.

Some two-bit company wants to use your GPL code, but does not want to negotiate with you for re-licensing it. They can tell you to suck dick, and they can just go ahead and develop their own code. Apple did that with Samba, which is GPL3. And now we can all laugh at Apple and the idiots who keep buying Apple products because their code base is a train wreck filled with security holes (and don't even try to deny that; just take a look at their track record: support.apple.com/en-us/HT202253).

So, please explain to me why you think that the GPL is evil. Because I do not understand it.

Other urls found in this thread:

phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Allwinner-Joins-LF
undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20060321034114
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

...

Any references about what those "evil GNU lawyers" are doing to those programmers? I want arguments, not comic strips that don't explain anything.

What is allwinner?
>I want arguments
Holy shit!

>Any references about what those "evil GNU lawyers" are doing to those programmers?
Cease and desist letters most likely. It's not like the FSF has the money for litigation.

Ironically, Red Star OS is Linux but completely closed-source

>What is allwinner?
A company who got rightfully fucked by the GPL and has now migrated to BSD, effectively doing the same thing as before without being rightfully fucked?

>Holy shit!
Can't provide them? Thought so.

>It's not like the FSF has the money for litigation.
Funnily there have been lots of lawsuits for GPL infringements. But keep telling yourself that.

And another GPL infringement. The only problem is that North Korea does not really give a fuck. In return we starve out their population.

I still don't see how that hurts "innocent programmers".

I'm not the guy who said it did

phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Allwinner-Joins-LF

Seems legit.

>Unfortunately, Allwinner as a company is still "learning" to be open-source friendly and to not violate the GPL and other licenses.
>Allwinner has violated the GPL multiple times, obfuscated their code, screwed around with their licenses, etc. They have said they're taking actions internally to improve the situation and last month at least released some open-source CedarX code finally, but it's still a long-road ahead.

So?

>B-b-but GPL is evil!

I am the OP.

You are a faggot.

As every OP under the Sun.

And you can't provide arguments.
But I get it, GPL > BSD ten out of ten times. Thank you for proving my point.

>I don't want to hear you, therefore you have no arguments
F.A.G.G.O.T.

BSD is a cuck license. It enables clients not giving you anything back. Period.

>I have nothing to say, yet I claim I have arguments
F.A.G.G.O.T^2

>implying GPL will force them to give back anything useful.

>implying you cannot sue their sorry ass back and forth
>implying it's never found out

Edgy teenagers really infest everything nowadays, don't they?

Yea at least they give you something, unlike BSD where they openly cuck you.

Reminder that if you program something of importance you use GPL. BSD is for programs that you really don't care about. It's like shitposting license: "do whatever the fuck you want I don't care about it"

>I'm blind and can't read my own thread
F.A.G.G.O.T.^4 + K.Y.S.

>innocent programmers
You mean code thieves.

Just because the source is open it doesn't mean you steal the fucking code, jamal. Give it back

>57720844
>making up random bullshit that doesn't even make sense
You don't even get a (You) from me.

Good. GPL is not anti-justice.

GPL is more about fostering a healthy community around the software. Yes some people could choose to attack that community, but they could do that regardless of what license you use.

>m-muh GPL freedom

You commies don't get it, do you?
The GPL is the most anti-freedom license in the history of mankind.

>Want to use a GPL library in your software?!
You BETTER be using GPL license in your software too goyim or else they're gonna sue your ass, even if you open-source it!

Commie retards claim that BSD is a cuck license, yet their own license is the purest definition of cuckolding, forcing you to open source it and relicensing it if you use any GPL component, making your own code their own.

Cry as much as you like, licenses like MIT, Apache and BSD are vastly superior compared to the GPL ones.

Hell, even the millenials knows what's better for their node.js "apps", they won't be cucking themselves just because a fat fucking faggot says so.

>You BETTER be using GPL license in your software too goyim or else they're gonna sue your ass, even if you open-source it!

Exactly. That's the fucking POINT of it.

>making your own code their own.
Wrong. Making it EVERYONE'S code.

The rest of your post is just blatant shitposting.

>The rest of your post is just blatant shitposting.
If you say so, commie cuck.

>57721093
>just proves my point again and again
Also no more (You)s for you.

>57721093
>can't even link someone's post properly
And you just proves my point.
Good day to you, commie cuck.

>57721144
>begging this hard for (You)s

...

You only have to GPL license your code if you take code that's GPL and put it in your own software. No-one forces you to do that. How is that not pure freedom?

...

forcing rights isnt freedom

Forcing rights is freedom for anyone else, not just your sorry ass.

all your civil rights are forced and you cant do nothing about it. Deal with it faggot, you can't even legally sell yourself to slavery, even with the BSD license.

>>Want to use a GPL library in your software?!
>You BETTER be using GPL license in your software too goyim or else they're gonna sue your ass, even if you open-source it!

Libraries use LGPL.

>licenses like MIT, Apache and BSD are vastly superior compared to the GPL ones.

Superior in what? Fucking with the users? Giving free blowjob to Apple, Google and Sony? Yes, in that case you are right you two legged clusterfuck.

This image is correct.

The number of GPL fags convinced to use BSD/MIT/whatever: 0
The number of BSD fags convinced to use GPL: 0

Expected chance for changing the result: 0%

I was using MIT in my project.
Now I changed to GPLv3, because I don't want people stealing my project, changing a few things (adding monetization), not open sourcing it and not giving me credits for the code.
Did I do it right?

For your previous code it's too late.
For new versions you are pretty much set - although "open sourcing" will not cut it for other people. They will have to grant others the same freedom as you granted them by being able to download, view and use your code.

Ok that's fine.
The previous code was pretty shitty desu.

Why the fuck to be honest becamse desu?

sounds like a bunch of microsoft propaganda,

if someone wants to licence their code as GNU/GPL that is their right, and it protects the code from corporate thievery

FreeBSD foundation's asking for donations has squat to do with their license and everything to do with not selling a product in the first place. FreeBSD could be GPL or proprietary and they'd still be asking for donations like many GPL projects also do.

The problem with GPL is that it prevents usage of the code in permissively licensed projects unless the latter relicenses. If I'm developing a BSD licensed project, a GPL library is no better for me than a proprietary one.

I am not concerned about corporations taking my code and not contributing back, especially since corporations do contribute code back to and even fund permissively licensed projects.

People are free to choose their own license. GPL is acceptable in my book. BSD, MIT, WTFPL, or CC0 are better. Choose GPL if you are afraid of your code being used for proprietary programs, but do realize it can't be used for a large subclass of free ones either.

>FreeBSD foundation's asking for donations has squat to do with their license and everything to do with not selling a product in the first place.

You DO know that as the originator you can re-license your code for specific clients? With GPL you can share your code with everyone while still making sure that companies are not gonna rip you off, and if they a company is truly interested in your code you can still sell it to them.

i think it's even funnier that he acts like the FSF and Linux Foundation don't receive money too

Receiving donations != publicly asking for them.

>The Free Software Foundation has planted the seeds of computer user freedom for more than three decades. Giving $10/month, Associate Members are the roots sustaining this work. Become a member to help us grow to our goal before December 31st.
LITERALLY on the FSF front page.

it's cute desu

I do, and what you're quoting has nothing to do with what you said. FreeBSD foundation is asking for donations because they are not making money off of selling FreeBSD. No matter what license FreeBSD has, their options would be to sell FreeBSD, take donations, or work on the OS without pay.

>making sure that companies are not gonna rip you off

If I say my code if freely usable and a company decides to use it freely, I'm not being ripped off. And GPL can be used by corporations. GPL vs permissive is a tradeoff between letting your code be used in any free software vs not letting your code be used in nonfree software. I prefer the first, even if the side effect is the nebulous threat of me being "ripped off".

>If I say my code if freely usable and a company decides to use it freely, I'm not being ripped off.
this

if they don't contribute back, that's their problem, they'll have more difficulty keeping up by not sending in diffs

they also tend to break the shit out of stuff (like pf for example) so no one really gives a shit

by the way i find it funny that barneyfag jr. was so desperate for shitting on BSD that he actually makes reddit accounts to post threads that get 0-3 replies

Have you actually ever seen OpenBSD donation announcements?
>undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20060321034114

your point was that the FSF didn't ask for donations

i gave you the evidence that they do

>I do, and what you're quoting has nothing to do with what you said.
Stopped reading.

I wonder if Stallman dresses like a normal person on Christmas.

Doesn't seem to be the first time for you.

You didn't give anything. They don't ask for donations, they offer membership. They don't existentially depend on them.

I would be honored if someone "steals" my code.

I often do that when the probability is high that the rest is just going to be utter rubbish.

>They don't ask for donations
>Giving $10/month, Associate Members are the roots sustaining this work.
>They don't existentially depend on them.
wow, you're fucking ignorant

if no one donates to the FSF or volunteers, they disappear

just like OpenBSD

>57723918
>wow, you're fucking ignorant
Stopped reading there as well. And you don't even get a (You)

i know, the truth hurts

it hurts you to know that the FSF and Stallman aren't aliens that don't need money like everyone else on earth

>57723949
>i know, the truth hurts
No, I just don't bother with bullshit.

really? that's why you claimed that only the openbsd foundation asked for money?

>57723992
>really?
Yes.

you're such a fucking child by the way

but i guess that's to be expected from FSF supporters, who are all leftists

>57724044
>you're such a fucking child by the way
And you keep replying like an autistic retard.

so are you, but you manage to look even more autistic by acting like (You)'s actually matter and not even reading half of the posts

if you didn't want to bother with bullshit, why did you come here and started talking about bullshit?

>57724103
>so are you
No, I am just baiting you and denying you of those (You)s you carve for.

I am gonna grab a bite, and then I am gonna drop a load on your failure.

>i-i was just pretending to be retarded
this is your life lmao

It seems that you think (You)s are of some value. Have a bunch.

i know right

freetards are pretty much children mentally

>57724315
You merely confuse them with your kind, which is incapable of thinking beyond the dot that you call "horizon". Not that I am surprised.

>57724206
At least I have them. Them and a bunch of GPL-licenced code. And you got nothing.

>Libraries use LGPL.
Libraries don't have to use LGPL. GNU recommends that they use GPL if there's no non-free alternative for what they are offering.

Free software according to people who use a BSD-like license:
>Here's my code. You may run, modify, and distribute it freely.
Free software according to people who use GPL:
>original coed donut steel that means u Apple!

GPLv2 is not evil. GPLv3 is evil due to its TiVoization of code. Linus has several talks on this regarding why Linux will not use the GPLv3.

depends on the codebase, depends on how much you care about the code
like, it doesn't matter for 90% of Sup Forums because the license would be longer than your fucking code half the time and it's not like Apple is going to steal your shitty 30 line script (also, there's a fairly decent rule of thumb: don't bother with a license that's larger than your code, for really small projects, there's literally zero good reason to use GPL other than puritanism)

really, the question is
>do I want people to actually use this code or do I want to protect it against corporate interests
sometimes, there are situations where the former outweighs the latter (easy, lazy example: libraries for working with file formats)

all things said though, it's your fucking code, you get to do what you want with it

BSD is a scam. Anyone can get the code and sell it as proprietary shit while letting the original die as crippleware.

GPL is free, as in free market. Stop fearing fair play you fuckers.

yeah rip openssh no one uses it anymore

>implying