Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Interestingly, FOSS means more freedom for the code and for the end user of the code but less freedom for any developer or company who might be reproducing and/or hosting the code.

Yeah, exactly like a ban on slavery means less freedom for those who would own, beed, and rent out slave labour. Are we supposed to cry at this evil restriction in the freedom of would-be slave owners, boo-hoo, and allow slavery in the name of freedom?

> The copyleft requirement of GNU licenses restrict what a developer and/or company can do with the code since it forces them to make any derived code public... Which is generally undesirable for commercial projects; especially early in their lifecycles when bugs may be present and would be best kept private until the project has been more battle-tested.

It's supposed to restrict that, just like laws are supposed to remove your "freedom" to murder or take slaves. Copyleft exists for the public good, not for commercial projects. It doesn't need to be "desirable" for them.

> GPL licenses are a good way to ensnare businesses and then up-sell other software licenses that are more suited for commercial use.

Utterly weird take.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: