Making money off the code, meaning you can't go sell the code. With BSD code you can.
I said a lot of people, I didn't say MORE people. With BSD there is also a lot of people using it that don't announce they are using the BSD based software. On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Cliff <cjk...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think it's good for people to advocate for their license > preferences. > > I also think the discussion should be based on facts, so I would like > to offer some observations about statements that make me > uncomfortable. > > > The freedom in software also comes the freedom of choice, to either give > > back or not, that is why a lot of people prefer the BSD thinking over the > > GPL thinking. > > I don't know what is meant by "a lot of people." But there are some > statistics that seem to indicate a lot more people prefer the GPL. As > of June 2009, the GPL licenses accounted for ~ 65% usage. BSD > accounted for 6.3. Now I realize that's more than 30 months ago, or > two centuries in internet years. Still, I doubt there has been a big > swing in the intervening time. > > You can read more about it here: > http://www.blackducksoftware.com/news/releases/2009-06-30 > > If there is later data that shows otherwise I would be happy to see > it. > > > GPL = Doesn't want anyone making money off their code... > > No. If this were anywhere close to true there would be mobs of angry > kernel developers protesting the activities of companies like Red Hat > and IBM, both companies making tons of money off GPL code. Got any? > > Also, if there is any credible evidence that any author of the GPL has > made a statement like that I would be happy to see it. > > > > On Feb 9, 2:34 pm, Bruce Wade <bruce.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I can see your point even though I don't 100% agree with it. I write most > > of my code opensource, however I also have been writing software for a > > living for around 14 years so sometimes we don't have the choice between > > open and closed source. > > > > We also can't expect only people interested in free software development > to > > use our software. Considering as you just said the software is there for > > others to use and if they add more features faster then you and don't > give > > you the features you also can't get upset. Also sharing code and sharing > > knowledge are not always one and the same. > > > > The freedom in software also comes the freedom of choice, to either give > > back or not, that is why a lot of people prefer the BSD thinking over the > > GPL thinking. > > > > BSD = Doesn't care if someone makes money off their code or not, they > just > > want people using their code. They also have the choice to release their > > code or not. > > GPL = Doesn't want anyone making money off their code and forces people > to > > recommit their code. This is good because everyone gets the code, bad > > because you don't have a choice. > > > > I am more of a BSD thinker. > > > > On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Wikus van de Merwe < > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dupakrop...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > What I see you are trying to say is that by keeping the code secret one > > > gains a temporary advantage over the competition. That might be true. > But > > > this is the way of thinking coming from the proprietary software > > > philosophy. How much will I loose by making the software free? If this > is > > > your line of thinking, then maybe writing free software is not what you > > > want to do. > > > > > Because at the core of the free software movement is a believe, that > > > sharing the code would make the world better. Free software is not > here to > > > make us rich. Is not here to make our software easy to (ab)use by > business. > > > It is here to preserve out freedoms. It represent an ethical view that > > > sharing knowledge is more important than making money. If you don't > agree > > > with that, then the free software is probably not for you. > > > > > Everyone writing free software should understand that the old business > > > models of proprietary software based on secrecy doesn't apply here. The > > > value is in the collaborative effort to improve the shared code. It > > > shouldn't bother you when somebody else builds on your code and gets > ahead > > > of you in terms of features, because this is what you wanted when you > > > decided to write the free software! Instead of complaining that this > puts > > > you out of the business you should rather seek for opportunities to > > > collaborate and write more code together which would be good for the > > > business too. And if you want to compete, compete in solving new > problems > > > (not the ones that have been already solved, there is no need to > duplicate > > > the works of others) and charge your customers for doing that. > > > > > Now, don't get me wrong. I admit it is not as easy to build a business > > > around the free software as it is in case of proprietary software. But > it > > > is not impossible or even especially hard. And is much more fun. This > is > > > why we shouldn't give up trying new ways just because they are > different to > > > what we know from the proprietary world. On the rise of cloud > platforms I > > > see future for the AGPL too. > > > > -- > > -- > > Regards, > > Bruce Wadehttp:// > ca.linkedin.com/in/brucelwadehttp://www.wadecybertech.comhttp://www.warplydesigned.comhttp://www.fitnessfriendsfinder.com > -- -- Regards, Bruce Wade http://ca.linkedin.com/in/brucelwade http://www.wadecybertech.com http://www.warplydesigned.com http://www.fitnessfriendsfinder.com
