• Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    edit-2
    12 hours ago

    So this sounds like a bad thing then…

    Like if having gpl code in free bsd forced all these companies to be more open with their software, and now they can be more closed with it, isn’t that bad?

    • cenzorrll@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      It allows freebsd to be true to the BSD license, and I agree with the author that it makes licensing easier. BSD will always be free and incredibly permissive, and I don’t see this changing anything. But a lot of the strides that linux has made is because people need to release their changes.

      BSD on the other hand doesn’t require giving back, so you get Apple that was the largest company in the world building off of the work of FreeBSD. I certainly don’t see FreeBSD being comparable to macOS like Fedora is to RHEL. It’s more like Apple took what they wanted and walked away.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Yes, it’s bad. Permissive licensing (instead of copyleft) is for cucks.

      • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        No no I just like seeing my work get used without any care or contribution back to create systems that absolutely don’t care about the rights of the users too /s