Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday January 18 2018, @02:27PM   Printer-friendly
from the waiting-for-the-multiverse-donor dept.

Over at the Meshed Insights blog, Simon Phipps writes about why the public domain falls short and more detailed licensing is needed in order to extend rights to a software community.

Yes, public domain may give you the rights you need. But in an open source project, it's not enough for you to determine you personally have the rights you need. In order to function, every user and contributor of the project needs prior confidence they can use, improve and share the code, regardless of their location or the use to which they put it. That confidence also has to extend to their colleagues, customers and community as well.

Source : The Universal Donor


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @02:39PM (58 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @02:39PM (#624143)

    What keeps a project "properly" open is the will of each individual, not legalese. That's why, say, the various BSDs tend to offer just as much freedom as those projects that have been infected with the GPL.

    You cannot be worried about other people taking the work as part of a closed source project. Make your open source project so good, that any closed-source venture doesn't matter.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @03:37PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @03:37PM (#624167)

    Indeed you cannot stop individual developers from being uncooperative and closing your source, particularly if you are unwilling to sue them.

  • (Score: 3, Touché) by turgid on Thursday January 18 2018, @03:51PM (41 children)

    by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Thursday January 18 2018, @03:51PM (#624176) Journal

    Said with all the ignorance of a true Libertarian.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @03:57PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @03:57PM (#624178)

      We're all waiting for what that means.

      At least the supposed "Libertarian" provided a basis for thinking about this stuff.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @04:02PM (34 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @04:02PM (#624180)

      Are your Communist GNU feelings hurt, dude?

      • (Score: 2) by turgid on Thursday January 18 2018, @04:06PM (33 children)

        by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Thursday January 18 2018, @04:06PM (#624181) Journal
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @04:15PM (20 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @04:15PM (#624183)

          Man oh man I can't wait until we're all living in the post scarcity GNU Utopia where we all code free software for fun after working full time jobs of ten hours a week at asteroid prospecting and robot repair.

          • (Score: 3, Interesting) by turgid on Thursday January 18 2018, @05:01PM (13 children)

            by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Thursday January 18 2018, @05:01PM (#624207) Journal

            It's coming soon! Using FOSS allows us all the benefit of being able to stand on the shoulders of giants. Here in the UK, we're about to undergo a revolution in agricultural automation to make up for the shortage of farm labourers. All that good food will get cheaper.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @05:11PM (12 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @05:11PM (#624218)

              Cheap food, that's just brilliant. I want to live in council housing on benefits while I watch Doctor Who and code FOSS all night!!

              • (Score: 2) by turgid on Thursday January 18 2018, @05:22PM (11 children)

                by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Thursday January 18 2018, @05:22PM (#624224) Journal

                Get used to it. There won't be many jobs for humans soon. We're going to have to think of something else to do with our time.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @05:34PM (9 children)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @05:34PM (#624235)

                  I can think of plenty of things to do with my time. Trouble is I can't maintain my lifestyle of the living without food and shelter. Coding doesn't pay the bills because the market value of open source is zero. Thank Stallman for starting the race to the bottom which will make all coders destitute.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @05:39PM (1 child)

                    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @05:39PM (#624238)

                    so a wage-slave retarded libertarian. enjoy swimming in your own ignorance

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @05:46PM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @05:46PM (#624244)

                      You couldn't be more wrong. I'm can't be a wage-slave since I'm unemployed, and I vote Green.

                  • (Score: 3, Informative) by turgid on Thursday January 18 2018, @07:36PM (6 children)

                    by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Thursday January 18 2018, @07:36PM (#624315) Journal

                    Funny that, I've been making a good living coding on FOSS platforms for over fifteen years now. End user applications are not where the money is. You have to think shoulders of giants.

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:02PM (5 children)

                      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:02PM (#624333)

                      Funny, my personal experience is exactly the opposite.

                      I've spent my career earning jack shit for making backend networking code that lets people communicate with each other. They never communicate with me, though. I'm nobody.

                      Software behind the scenes that nobody knows or cares about isn't valuable enough to pay for. It's just not visible enough.

                      I've been making a good living coding on FOSS platforms for over fifteen years now.

                      Interesting choice of words, "coding on FOSS platforms." How much of your actual code is open source, dear person who pretends to code open source for pay?

                      • (Score: 2) by turgid on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:53PM (3 children)

                        by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:53PM (#624379) Journal

                        Interesting choice of words, "coding on FOSS platforms." How much of your actual code is open source, dear person who pretends to code open source for pay?

                        I never pretended to code open source for pay, although I did work for $LARGEUNIXCO many years ago integrating FOSS into the OS (and I have 3 lines of code in the kernel, which was open sourced...)

                        In my spare time I dabble and have put one or two silly little things on the Intertubes, mostly for comedy value.

                        However, I have invested time and energy helping newbies get up to speed with Linux (privately and in a corporate setting) so I'm not a complete and utter leach on "the Community." And I have a Slackware subscription.

                        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @09:04PM (2 children)

                          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @09:04PM (#624393)

                          Spoken like a leech.

                          Vote Tory to keep your ill-gotten money.

                      • (Score: 2) by turgid on Thursday January 18 2018, @09:02PM

                        by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Thursday January 18 2018, @09:02PM (#624390) Journal

                        Software behind the scenes that nobody knows or cares about isn't valuable enough to pay for. It's just not visible enough.

                        Oh yes it is. One particular thing I worked on is on at least 500 000 devices. That was years ago. I bet it's twice that now.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 20 2018, @01:17AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 20 2018, @01:17AM (#624997)

                  Starve?

          • (Score: 3, Funny) by JNCF on Thursday January 18 2018, @06:52PM (4 children)

            by JNCF (4317) on Thursday January 18 2018, @06:52PM (#624291) Journal

            GNU Utopia GNUtopia

            FTFY

            • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @07:33PM (3 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @07:33PM (#624313)

              GNU's Not Utopia

              You're right. It's a dystopian plot designed to make everyone as poor as RMS.

              • (Score: 2) by JNCF on Thursday January 18 2018, @07:54PM (2 children)

                by JNCF (4317) on Thursday January 18 2018, @07:54PM (#624327) Journal

                It's a brave GNU world.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:09PM (1 child)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:09PM (#624339)

                  The GNU lifestyle is great if you like living like a bum and being treated like shit. But let's be real. Open source doesn't pay a dime. You can write as much code as you like but there's no money to be made by coding.

                  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by JNCF on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:30PM

                    by JNCF (4317) on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:30PM (#624357) Journal

                    I've heard Harry Potter Lennart Poettering can transmute unnecessary complexity into user support contracts.

          • (Score: 3, Informative) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Friday January 19 2018, @12:25AM

            by fido_dogstoyevsky (131) <axehandleNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Friday January 19 2018, @12:25AM (#624490)

            ...where we all code free software for fun after working full time jobs...

            I don't think you understand how enlightened self interest [wikipedia.org] works.

            --
            It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
        • (Score: 2) by meustrus on Thursday January 18 2018, @04:21PM (11 children)

          by meustrus (4961) on Thursday January 18 2018, @04:21PM (#624186)

          When you make the State stronger to enforce collectivism, you have simply transferred power from one group of capitalists to another, and Karl Marx turns over in his grave.

          --
          If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
          • (Score: 3, Funny) by Dr Spin on Thursday January 18 2018, @04:30PM (1 child)

            by Dr Spin (5239) on Thursday January 18 2018, @04:30PM (#624190)

            Karl Marx turns over in his grave

            If we can get him turning fast enough, it will be a good source of renewable energy.

            --
            Warning: Opening your mouth may invalidate your brain!
            • (Score: 2) by meustrus on Thursday January 18 2018, @06:06PM

              by meustrus (4961) on Thursday January 18 2018, @06:06PM (#624253)

              Like this? [smbc-comics.com]

              --
              If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @04:34PM (7 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @04:34PM (#624193)

            The State (or, more precisely, an organization that calls itself "government") is founded on the principle of "do-as-I-say" coercion rather than on "do-as-we-previously-agreed" cooperation; the State is inherently anti-Capitalism; the State is not just another group of Capitalists.

            • (Score: 2) by meustrus on Thursday January 18 2018, @06:14PM (6 children)

              by meustrus (4961) on Thursday January 18 2018, @06:14PM (#624256)

              The straw man libertarian strikes again!

              No, your distinction is meaningless, and the contract law that capitalists rely upon only exists at the whim of the State anyway. You could more accurately say that capitalists use "do-as-we-previously-agreed-because-the-state-says" coercion, which is also, big surprise, exactly the same as what constitutional governments use. And either of them can (and do!) use your caveat of "but-the-state-can-make-exceptions".

              --
              If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @06:28PM (5 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @06:28PM (#624270)

                Contract enforcement is a service like any other; there's no inherent need for some culturally blessed monopoly.

                Indeed, competing enforcement agencies would be a much better Separation of Powers.

                That is to say, your premise is what is in dispute.

                • (Score: 2) by meustrus on Thursday January 18 2018, @07:30PM (4 children)

                  by meustrus (4961) on Thursday January 18 2018, @07:30PM (#624310)

                  What you are describing sounds like feudal Europe. Which I may remind you is called the "dark ages" for a reason.

                  --
                  If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @07:39PM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @07:39PM (#624316)

                    Also, feudalism is not the reason that period was called "the Dark Ages".

                    Is there no end to your inanity?

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:35PM (2 children)

                    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:35PM (#624362)

                    The black plague and Mongols killing everybody, book burnings, etc, is why it's called the dark ages. Lack of strong central authority is not.

                    • (Score: 2) by meustrus on Friday January 19 2018, @03:09PM (1 child)

                      by meustrus (4961) on Friday January 19 2018, @03:09PM (#624701)

                      Mongols are a strong external threat that is best countered by a large unified defense force, which is impossible when feudal lords are too busy fighting each other.

                      Book burnings are a consequence of ideology and totalitarianism. I'd like to see somebody try to rationalize how the feudal system was not inherently anti-enlightenment and totalitarian.

                      The aforementioned squabbling feudal lords kept society from advancing by funneling its resources into a never-ending parade of small wars. Many, many times a potentially successful medieval society broke down when the strong central authority died and his many sons went about carving up the kingdom into little warring fiefdoms.

                      The plague though, I'm not going to blame that on feudalism. But the dark ages includes centuries where the plague didn't even exist.

                      --
                      If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
                      • (Score: 2) by t-3 on Saturday January 20 2018, @02:21PM

                        by t-3 (4907) on Saturday January 20 2018, @02:21PM (#625154)

                        There book burnings were a result of the plague. Illiterates who were hopeless and disillusioned, but knew that pieces of paper recorded debts they owed, burned everything. There was also a big backlash from the church against the big rise in paganism and atheism that came during/after the plague. As for central authority resisting Mongols: See China.

          • (Score: 2) by turgid on Thursday January 18 2018, @04:41PM

            by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Thursday January 18 2018, @04:41PM (#624195) Journal

            I see you've read Animal Farm.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by TheRaven on Thursday January 18 2018, @05:13PM (3 children)

      by TheRaven (270) on Thursday January 18 2018, @05:13PM (#624219) Journal

      Nope, he's exactly right. A lot of humans, when confronted with a set of rules, will try hard to figure out how to do what they want without violating the letter of the rules. Both programmers and lawyers tend to exhibit this characteristic, because it's beneficial in their chosen professions (a lot of programming is trying to make something possible within the constraints of the system that you have to work with).

      If you create a complex license to try to force people to restrict what people can do with a project, then a lot of people will spend effort looking for loopholes. For example, the nVidia drivers work around the intention of the GPL. There is a binary blob that is entirely nVidia's IP (SGI and other lawsuits aside). There is a BSD-licensed shim that is a derived work of both the Linux kernel and blob. The GPL requirements come into effect in two ways. First, if you distribute the GPL'd code then anything that you ship linked to it is bound by the terms. That's fine, nVidia doesn't distribute their blob with the Linux kernel. Second, via something being a derived work. The blob is not a derived work of the kernel (directly or via the shim). The shim is a derived work of the kernel, but the GPL only requires that derived works provide the same freedoms as the GPL, not that they provide the same restrictions, so a BSD licensed shim is fine. Now nVidia has done a complete end-run around the GPL. Note that this does cause some problems for distributions (you can't ship the kernel and the nVidia driver together, so you end up shipping a package that downloads the blob from nVidia and installs it).

      The best way of getting people to do something is to convince them that it's in their best interests. No license can do this, only a community. If a community makes it easy to submit patches then it's easy to convince someone that it's cheaper to submit their improvements upstream than to maintain a fork. If the community helps to fix bugs, then it's easy to convince them that it's worth developing things in the open.

      --
      sudo mod me up
      • (Score: 3, Informative) by turgid on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:47PM (2 children)

        by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:47PM (#624372) Journal

        Nope, he's exactly right.

        No he isn't. He's trolling. Look at his wording and the pejorative term "infected with the GPL." In recent years, it has become for ACs to troll the GPL with wishy-washy pro-BSD arguments and FUD regarding the GPL. In my opinion there is a place for BSD, GPL, closed-source, Public Domain and all sorts of licenses (and lack thereof) for software. Many people, and corporations prefer BSD because it gives them the right to take code developed by others, to modify it and to distribute the binaries of the changed code without having an obligation to make the changed source code available to the end user. This is in fundamental contrast to the GPL, which enforces this right for the end user. Personally, in my own time, at home, I prefer GPL but I'm not an ideological purist. I use all kinds of FOSS and very little closed-source software. Over the years I have developed various proprietary embedded systems, on FOSS and non-FOSS platforms. None of them infringed the GPL or BSD or any other license. Everything was done ethically and legally. I've spoken up to senior management with concerns in a polite and constructive way when I've seen things that needed addressing, and they always were.

        A lot of humans, when confronted with a set of rules, will try hard to figure out how to do what they want without violating the letter of the rules.

        Indeed they will. That's how the law works, and it's how it has to work in a democracy. I fully support that, with the caveat that the law is continually reviewed, revised, amended with full public scrutiny as required.

        Both programmers and lawyers tend to exhibit this characteristic, because it's beneficial in their chosen professions (a lot of programming is trying to make something possible within the constraints of the system that you have to work with).

        Correct. I've sat in on various presentations about Intellectual Property by some pretty well qualified and intelligent lawyers.

        The best way of getting people to do something is to convince them that it's in their best interests. No license can do this, only a community.

        Yes, the licenses are necessary, but not sufficient.

        If a community makes it easy to submit patches then it's easy to convince someone that it's cheaper to submit their improvements upstream than to maintain a fork. If the community helps to fix bugs, then it's easy to convince them that it's worth developing things in the open.

        Yes. Any how does this relate to "GPL infection" as the OP trolled? If you don't like the code/language/license/community chose a different package. If you can't find one for free, write one yourself, pay someone to write one or get one off the shelf.

        This is freedom of choice, liberty and an open and free market. To which part specifically do you and our OP troll object?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:58PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:58PM (#624386)

          Over the years I have developed various proprietary embedded systems, on FOSS and non-FOSS platforms.

          Thanks for confirming you don't get paid for FOSS. You just exploit the free labor of everyone who never got paid for the FOSS you use. How do you live with yourself knowing you benefit from standing on the shoulders of starving coders?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @04:56PM (5 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @04:56PM (#624204)

    that have been infected with the GPL.

    Thank you for demonstrating your bias that openly.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @05:50PM (4 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @05:50PM (#624247)

      If only Stallman could have been satisfied with BSD then there wouldn't have been colossal duplication of effort to reinvent Unix as GNU/Linux.

      • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @06:59PM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @06:59PM (#624294)

        At the time, BSD Unix was entirely proprietary and closed-source, and likely would have remained so indefinitely were it not for competition from GNU.

        If only people were all benevolent altruists who would instinctively share all their innovations and improvements freely with their users, and those whose shoulders they have stood upon, BSD would have been sufficient.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @07:13PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @07:13PM (#624304)

          The whole point is that the license doesn't seem to matter.

          The BSDs are largely FOSS now not because of the GPL, but because of a shift in thinking—as the OP said, FOSS is an act of individual will, not legalese.

          BSD became FOSS due to the work of not Stallman, but rather the work of Bill and Lynne Jolitz [wikipedia.org]. And, you know what? Thank goodness for the initial proprietary software; someone had to pay to develop the ideas of Unix in the first place.

          • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:06PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:06PM (#624336)

            "The 386BSD port [by Jolitzes] was possible because, partly influenced by Stallman, Berkeley hacker Keith Bostic had begun an effort to clean AT&T proprietary code out of the BSD sources in 1988." -- http://www.faqs.org/docs/artu/ch02s01.html [faqs.org]

      • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @07:04PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @07:04PM (#624298)

        BSD was proprietary when Stallman started his efforts. And it still might be if it wasn't for Stallman and other free software advocates.

  • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Thursday January 18 2018, @06:41PM (6 children)

    by Thexalon (636) on Thursday January 18 2018, @06:41PM (#624282)

    The problem with BSD licensing, from my point of view at least: The primary user of BSD these days is Apple. So basically working on BSD code is you (or your firm, if somebody's paying you) putting in your hours so that Apple can get whatever great innovations you come up with for free.

    --
    The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @07:42PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @07:42PM (#624319)

      I don't see how that negatively affects you.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Thexalon on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:57PM

        by Thexalon (636) on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:57PM (#624385)

        It's the difference between, say, volunteering at the local food bank, and volunteering to work for Walmart for free. One is giving away your time for the greater public good, one is giving away your time so somebody who's already rich can get richer.

        --
        The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:39PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:39PM (#624367)

      You really don't get what open source is all about, do you?

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:46PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18 2018, @08:46PM (#624371)

        Open source is about slave labor. Unpaid slaves do the work. Corporations get the profits.

        By convincing programmers to use the GPL, RMS sold programmers into slavery.

        GNU is a cult and RMS is a slave trader.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 19 2018, @07:02AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 19 2018, @07:02AM (#624606)

          Lame troll is lame. Actually Stallman as the GPL creator is the one person protecting software freedom.

          The corporations cannot abuse your (A)GPL'd software but they can and do use MIT, BSD and PD stuff all the time.

          If you can't make money as a programmer, do something else or learn some useful skill as a programmer.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 20 2018, @01:57AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 20 2018, @01:57AM (#625005)

      So, in summary, BSD licensing is bad "because Apple." You know, you've got me thinking. Google uses a GPL licensed operating system as a thin layer between hardware and massive amounts of proprietary software. I don't like GPL licensed software "because Google". I guess I'm off to install Windows. At least Microsoft writes all their own stuff!

  • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday January 18 2018, @10:07PM

    by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Thursday January 18 2018, @10:07PM (#624428) Journal

    You, and the other proponents of the *BSD license because "MUH FREEDUMBZ" are missing an important point, one I've cribbed from a close friend but came up with myself too: the fewest restrictions up-front does not necessarily equal the most freedom for all.

    Basically, imagine it like this: you have two playgrounds. One of them has no rules imposed by the adults. The other has a set of rules specifically intended to keep the kids from hurting one another. They're allowed to play how they wish but they don't get to, for example, play "everyone gang up on one kid and beat the tar out of him/her."

    Which one do you think, over time, will be the one kids enjoy playing in more?

    When you understand this, you'll understand why the GPL is important. The BSD license has its place, but it's a rather r-type strategy and not one guaranteed to pay dividends for humanity in general in the long run.

    --
    I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 19 2018, @02:35AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 19 2018, @02:35AM (#624526)

    it doesn't only matter if bsd stayed free. another unacceptable outcome is that leech ass corporations and devs will use your code to subjugate others when they make their version unfree.