117
Cuck License (lemmy.ml)
submitted 11 hours ago by to c/linux@lemmy.ml
removed 30 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -3 points 10 hours ago (3 children)

MIT, Apache, or bust. I don't consider copy left true open source. I welcome the downvotes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 9 hours ago (1 child)

    Non-copyleft licenses are shortsighted, they ignore what happens after. The code may be open at the moment it's being shared, but it won't stay open in the future if you don't plan for it. That's what copyleft does.

    I find it fascinating that some people's definition of freedom is so narrow as to completely ignore consequences. It's like saying "I'm more free than the average person because unlike them I can step out this window and fly for 2 seconds". Great, but then what?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 9 hours ago

    The code doesn't disappear just because a company uses it privately.

    I don't want to dox myself so I'll stay vague but I work for a non profit tied to an educational campus and we don't touch anything that is copy left because of the headache it causes. The vetting process just never ends and it's the equivalent of constantly walking on eggshells.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 9 hours ago

    if you can see the code, it's open source. the term you're looking for is FOSS, and it's "free" as in the community is free to benefit from all modifications as a whole. freedom of end users vs freedom of developers.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent