• exocortex@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 days ago

    What is the problem with a BSD-license? I’m not familiar with the different open source licensing models and their problems.

    • Allero@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      Basically, it allows you to steal all the code and use it in your closed-source programs, giving a green light for corporations to use open-source code without giving anything back.

      GPL doesn’t allow that, forcing you to open-source anything that was produced using other GPL-licensed code. That’s, for example, why so much of Linux software is open-source - it commonly relies on various dependencies that are GPL-licensed, so there is no other legal option other than sharing the code as well.

      • communism@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        It’s not “stealing”. It’s explicitly allowed. Using IP according to its licence is the opposite of stealing.

        • graphene@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Unrelated to this exact discussion, but like, the law does not dictate morality nor the other way around. If I believe that using someone’s hard work to make a profit without paying them or contributing some work of your own is morally wrong, I can reasonably say it’s ‘stealing’. Even if the person who did the work fully understands that the license under which the work was released makes it not actually stealing.

          I am judging someone as a thief, not legally but morally.

          • communism@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            23 hours ago

            I never stated what was or wasn’t moral; I stated what was legal, and stealing is a legalistic term. How can you enforce property ownership, intellectual or material, without law, and legal rights to property?

            For the record, I want the abolition of property and of law. I do not believe stealing to be wrong. “Stealing” can only be a legal category if you believe it to be morally neutral.

            That definition also makes no sense. If I gift you a laptop I worked hard to afford and you use it, no sane person would call that stealing, even to those to whom stealing is a moral category. That is the same thing as someone using MIT code according to the licence. The original coder gifted the code to the public and said “I explicitly want you to use this however you like, under the sole condition that you credit me.” Just like if I gifted you a laptop I’d be saying “I want you to use this laptop however you like.”