238
Is the FOSS world in danger of a corporate takeover, thanks to pushover licenses? (lemmy.world)
submitted 11 months ago by to c/linux@lemmy.ml
95 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I ask this because I think of the recent switch of Ubuntu to the Rust recode of the GNU core utils, which use an MIT license. There are many Rust recodes of GPL software that re-license it as a pushover MIT or Apache licenses. I worry these relicensing efforts this will significantly harm the FOSS ecosystem. Is this reason to start worrying or is it not that bad?

IMO, if the FOSS world makes something public, with extensive liberties, then the only thing that should be asked in return is that people preserve these liberties, like the GPL successfully enforces. These pushover licenses preserve nothing.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 14 points 11 months ago

Permissive licensing can create what is effectively "software tivoization" (the restriction or dirty interpretation of distribution and modification rights of software by the inclusion of differently-licensed components).

The Bitwarden case is a good example of how much damage can be done to a brand with merely the perception of restrictive licensing. obviously, bitwarden has clarified the mess, but not before it was being called 'proprietary' by the whole oss community.

So I don't think op is referring to direct corporate takeover, but damage caused by corporate abuse of a fork.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent