How do you not read this and the intent behind it and think, 'holy shit, this is evil'?
Why is it evil?
>>108666131GPL is basically communism
>>108666131And what is the good one?
What’s evil is taking someone else’s hard work they provide for free and paywalling it. There’s nothing wrong with the GPL.
Because I have a brain
>>108666131It's a necessary evil to fight IP laws. If IP didn't exist, the GPL would be unneededd
What's the default license anyway? If you don't specify anything that is.
Because, and not everyone gets this one: You do not have to use it.You do not need to apply it to your own code, you do not need to use code that is GPL licensed. It does not apply to the binaries you link it into, it does not apply to the things the binary produces.For all anyone else cares, you can use a license that says you have no rights at all to your own code and that it can only be used by corporations explicitly for profit (theirs, not yours).You are already free, as in freedom, to license code you write yourself however you want, and the GPL doesn't do anything worse than companies have done or are doing with patents, copyrights, and license agreements.
>>108666585Technically if you don't license your code before you distribute it publicly, other people are not allowed to use it at all, period. Good luck enforcing that though.
>>108666319It's libertarianism.
>>108666623thats MIT
I agree the GPL shouldn't allow people to sell other people's software unless they significantly modify it. But we all know that doesn't work. the people selling GIMP and LibreOffice on Ebay from disk get next to nothing
>>108666886>the people selling GIMP and LibreOffice on Ebay from disk get next to nothingThat doesn't violate the GPL, tripfag. It's not even a violation in spirit.
>>108666319Yes I launched nano yesterday and it asked for my vaccine passport
>>108666131>How do you not read this and the intent behind it and think, 'holy shit, this is evil'?
i care about the freedom of the user and the creator more than the freedom of the soulless companies that want to exploit the work while giving nothing back
>>108666319>communism is le bad>b-because it just is, okay??
>I have to acknowledge that these things weren't made by mepure evil...
>>108667083god, I wish you westie retards got a little taste of commie utopia someday. just a little taste.
>>108667237You just said that is what GPL is.
>>108667247>4chan is one person
>>108666623that's CC0, retard
>>108666585In western countries, thanks to copyright laws, it's proprietary and (if published somewhere) source available.
>>108666301I'm a corporate whore, and it is against my dad-brand's interest.
>>108666585https://choosealicense.com/no-permission/
>>108666528>paywallingOh, so you didn't read it.
>>108666301Communism/libertarianism analogies to one side, I think a better analogy is someone with autism installing themselves as a dictator.>I am deciding what's right for you. But don't worry, I know which civil liberties are the best ones. Every autistic person I know has this exact fantasy and it's pretty cute lol. They just don't get why it's a bad thing, because to their un-empathic brains, they're correct.Of course the GNU/GPL guys think they're doing right. But the very fact you have to "infect" others...shouldn't that tell you something? We are just waiting for them to (actually) die at this point.
v3 is kinda evil but v2 is mostly ok
>>108666131GPL is like saying "if you use this forum, you cannot sue anyone for hate speech for what was said on this forum"And then retarded pseudo-lolbergs say that this is communism.
>>108666528GPL lets you paywall other people's stuff.Even AGPL lets you do that, but you need to share any changes you've made if you offer a forked program as a service.
>>108669049>NOOOOO>Corporations must be allowed to lock me from modifying my device using hardware DRM
>>108667237But what does utopia mean again? Because it's unachievable. Because it's against human nature.
>>108669286that should be up to the hardware manufacturer.
>>108669967>suing you for hate speech should be up to the individualI disagree
>>108669979i know it's hard, but try to stay on topic, freetard
>>108666898I know it doesn't but it should imo unless they modify it heavily.
>>108666131>>108667677Unlike the real world software can be a little communist because data is free. But in reality corporations also figured out how to profit off it so it cancels out. Personally I see it as self defense for smaller projects. Ultimately I agree a BSD license would be better.I'm autistic but I wouldn't consider myself a freetard. I fail to derive a right or wrong from any of the licenses themselves. But in a round-about way the GPL is more cucked than BSD because corporations create organizations to tell you how to code for them (such as Redhat infesting FreeDesktop)If BSD was more popular corporations would build off a standardized base, but the base itself would be owned by no one.
>>108666131Hello Mr Corpo, how's the boot of your boss taste?
>>108666131>free as in freedom I’m always skeptical of this phrase because it implies you’re going to try to sell me something. Fuck you.
>>108667201>*for meI'd tell you to not play stupid but it seems is all you do around here
can someone expalin to a retard like me the nuance about linking GPL code with yours. i read if you statically link GPL code your code is now needs to be GPL compliant. but if you dynamically link its a little bit grey since others can just swap out and modify the GPL library. but the lgpl kinda chancels this out. so if i want to make gpl libraries lgpl would be the most accesssible way? instead of giving others the ick?
>>108672690>If BSD was more popular corporations would build off a standardized base, but the base itself would be owned by no one.What do you think of the Chromium/Chrome model? Permissive base used for proprietary product
>>108674372Yeah that's pretty much what I'm describing. Another example could be how FreeBSD gets contributions from Apple and a handful of router companies but is a solid OS on it's own.The GPL would encourage these companies to do a hostile takeover of the project's governance and "democratically" make decisions amongst themselves. Even with Chromium being set up from the beginning to assert Google's monopoly, because it's permissive we have options like Edge, Ungoogled, Brave and Opera.
>write software and release it with GPL because you want people to use and modify it freely>force them to provide the same freedoms, as you the original author intendedi fail to see how that is evil. it only fucks over corporate fags.
>>108666578https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html
