Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 20:52:25 +0200 From: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> To: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> Cc: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Why Clang Message-ID: <20120619205225.21d6709f.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206191953280.8234@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> References: <402199FE-380B-41B6-866B-7D5D66C457D5@lpthe.jussieu.fr> <CAH3a3KWKNF5Bt-8=KgtbMh=rV6GfUO7OaeE6-SutxkcRe8cG3Q@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206191953280.8234@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 19:54:45 +0200 (CEST), Wojciech Puchar wrote: > anyway - can someone point me an article about explaining in human > language (contrary to lawyer language) why GPLv3 is more limiting in > reality over v2 . > > Does GPLv3 does force programs you compile with gcc to be GPLed? As far as I know, the main difference is that the GPLv3 is often called a "viral license". Software linking against v3 libraries and so maybe programs compiled by a v3 compiler will have - according to the license - to be released as v3 too. Code that is v3 once cannot become "something different" (either v2, BSDL or closed). GPLv2 does have fewer restrictions, emphasizing the freedom of the developer: It's not okay to turn v2 programs into closed source. However, it is okay to make derivates from it as long as the derivates are also published (contributed back). GPLv3 also has this requirement. GPL protects the freedom of the programmer who licensed his code under those licenses: He wants it to be free for use, but not to be turned into closed source products. A programmer who does not want to raise this barrier will typically use the BSD license which is "more free". BSDL in opposite is often criticized a "rape me license". It explicitely (!) allows creating derivates in a closed source manner. This means that parts of BSD licensed code can be a key component in a proprietary closed source product that is for sale (e. g. a firewall appliance), and nobody will find out about that fact. WP has a nice comparison: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_free_and_open_source_software_licenses http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License All those licenses do _not_ allow to steal copyright! -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120619205225.21d6709f.freebsd>