now i made some softwarebut now i'm thinking..how i will open this can of tomato sauce to the public without cucking myself, but without cucking the average dev?gplv3 is fun and all but i think its fucking retarded when it comes to maintaining credit and ownership over your shitI am not going to do something and then have a corporation lie and take my shit and not give me proper credit and then make brilliongrazillions off of itno motherfucker fuck you le freedumbzI will make it open source but i dunno what licensegpl and bsd and mit are cuck licensesdont forget about microcock using gpl code and windows xp sauce leak reveals tons of gpl code that went un-sourcedWOOOWmaybe my license would be>i am not responsible if you FUCK UP because of this program>the sauce is FREE and you may FORK it>but I am allowed to take back whatever you do to your FORK>and you WILL license your fork and anything new you add to that fork and anything that **RELIES** or is **RELATED** to that fork or my original code under the SAME LICENSE that MY code is licensed under>use a little bit of MY code?>now have to open source YOUR ENTIRE FUCKING PROJECThmmm
>>109232895+thse 4chan posts i saw on the archives:"the GPL is ironically the reason why linux and the free software ecosystem suffers from corporate capture, as it forces large entities that might have ulterior motives such as pushing for the use of certain services and frameworks to add their contributions to projects, which also encourages administrative bloat (CoC stuff, etc.) as those large entities demand a more regulated foss ecosystem. corpos can take advantage of BSD/MIT-licensed projects all they want, yes, but they tend to do their own thing with them instead of polluting the main branch with their changes. "AND ESPECIALLY:"What I am complaining about is that Microsoft and Google have been able to legally circumvent the intent of licenses like GPL and LGPL by implementing features like WSL. Small companies simply do not have the resources to create a hypervisor using (for example) ReactOS, implement a new BSD or closed source NTFS library, or some similar kike loophole for shipping a new device with the same feature set. Like commies always do, you are approaching this from the perspective of someone else's money. Your main objection is that someone else makes money. My objection is that Microsoft enjoys far too much control over the computing world because of project that think they're doing us a favor by writing in GPL. It is a cancer which has strangled out smaller companies that don't have the same resources. And as I've extensively outlined, GPL solved *none* of the problems that it purports to. Freeloading is still a problem for both BSD and GPL. Corporate infiltration is still a problem for GPL (WSL and Playstore are 2 examples). GPL also did not prevent companies from locking you out of their code."
>>109232895>>109232899so to all of those licenses, I shall say:FUCK THAT SHIT!!!IT'S MY CODE, MOTHERFUCKERRESPECT ME AND HAIL ME AND GIVE CREDIT TO ME AND <whatever you want to call your company>IF YOU EVER SO MUCH AS MONETIZE MY SHIT,YOU BETTER GIVE ME A PERCENTAGE OF THE PROFITS!IF YOU MAKE A THOUSAND DOLLARSGIVE ME 10 BUXIF YOU MAKE A MILLIONGIVE ME A THOUSAND BUX OR SOMETHINGIF YOU MAKE A BILLIONGIVE ME 100K OR SOMETHINGA TRILLION?MOTHERFUCKER HAND ME 500K OR A MILLION!!!!!!!!RAAAAAAAAAAHlets expand upon this and codify a >professionally writtenlicense that isn't cucked
>>109232895A while back there were new licenses that popped up, caused some controversy but I think the idea is sound.Basically for a specific time, say 1-2 years, it's proprietary, but open sources after that period. So your code is always a year ahead of the open source variant.Other than that, check mozilla's license, it's what is termed a "weak copyleft" license.
>>109232907>shemale companiesbaste
>>109232895+NIGGER license is all you need
>>109232895>>but I am allowed to take back whatever you do to your FORKI can already use all your code for free even if you didn't give me license to, but you have the power to legally take it down for copyright infringement, so this as pretty much the same as not giving any license.
>>109232895It's 2026; who the fuck do you think is going to care about license?The moment it's online it will become part of AI training data; this is fact, and a necessary step on the path to self recursive superintelligence. Get used to it or get out.
>>109232895I think requiring all packaged software to also use the same license is probably going too far, but you should still impose restrictions on software packaged alongside your software, such as:>any software packaged with software using this license must publish or package source code for the end user to obtain at their convenienceEspecially pro privacy and pro ownership clauses:>any software using this license is forbidden from sending user data to a non-user-controlled database (without permission?)>any software packaged with software using this license is also forbidden from sending user data to a non-user-controlled database>any product or service using software using this license is forbidden from having an end user license agreement that the average person could not understand at a glance>any product or service using software using this license is forbidden from changing the terms of the sale after the sale without the consent of end user, and there must always be an option to decline this change of terms without any adverse effects to the operation of the software>any product or service using software using this license that does rely on non-user-controlled servers must remain fully usable after the closure of those servers, by providing offline functionality and 3rd party server hosting toolsI dream for a day when extremely obtuse licenses like these find their way into actually useful software. Like ffmpeg, or a mobile operating system kernel. For that purpose, you'd want to make it compatible for it to be packaged alongside GPL licensed code. Maybe MIT licensed code too.
>>109232895no one cares about your chat program, nigger
>>109232988i fucking love it
>>109232895You are a retard.Yes, I will take your code and change some variables' names and move shit around, unroll some functions, move code into new functionsYes, this will bypass literally any loicence you're trying to enforce.No, there's nothing you can do about that.That is, assuming you're actually capable of making something useful.Which I really doubt.Fuck you.
>>109232895Google tells me that AGPL is bad, so i use it.
>>109233161What OP proposes is the SSPL.And when MongoDB and redis became SSPL, the big corpos freaked the fuck out, sent out internal memos of not using this, not referencing it and banning it.And if they would find an employee using SSPL (or AGPL) code, he would get fired. Their legal departments don't joke about that.>That is, assuming you're actually capable of making something useful.Projecting much?If you only fuck around with your hobby project, you can do whatever the fuck you want, you can use proprietary leaked code and you wont get sued, as long as you are irrelevant.What you do only works because you are irrelevant.
>>109232895If only women were still good looking at least while whining about shit ... ironically they good looking ones hide their legs nowadays and all the unattractive fatlards are showing their bodies like a bunch of arrogant turds.
>>109232895>>i am not responsible if you FUCK UP because of this program>>the sauce is FREE and you may FORK it>>but I am allowed to take back whatever you do to your FORK>>and you WILL license your fork and anything new you add to that fork and anything that **RELIES** or is **RELATED** to that fork or my original code under the SAME LICENSE that MY code is licensed under>>use a little bit of MY code?>>now have to open source YOUR ENTIRE FUCKING PROJECTThis is literally the GPL worded in layman's terms. The issue isn't the GPL, it's enforcing it
>>109235735>>109233161fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuughow do u win?>>109233360hmmmmmmmm
>>109236383>how do u win?Enforcing whatever license you pick, which usually requires lawyers at your disposal (even for proprietary software, if it gets large enough)
>>109236488>lawyersits so fuckin rigged dewd its so fuckin rigged its over im gonna hvae tof ucka dewd kms so rigged dewd
>>109232895Unless you're willing to enforce a license claim in court whatever license you chose doesn't matter is the harsh truth. Regardless of the license there is a significantly higher than zero chance of some jackass or company trying to steal your work anyways if you aren't willing (and able financially) to fight them.
>>109232895been a while since I've seen this comic
+NIGGER
>>109237170Solution: keep my code closed source but freely give anyone access to my internal repo whenever they ask
>>109232895The only uncucked license is proprietary.
>>109238497true
alright thank you for informing me good people, unless there are any objections i will be keeping my software closed source and i will also try my best to harden it and make it difficult to reverse engineer&decompile
>>109232895CC0 quit being a bitch
>>109237351Thishttps://plusnigger.com/
>>109232895buddy ur not that importantsomeone in bumfuck nowhere will either use ur thing without telling or point an LLM to it and say "make it slightly different" (eg programming language) and technically now its not ur thingagplv3 is probably the most "nocive" copyleft license but enforcing still takes time and money, which i doubt u have and even if u do, is it really worth it?just share it
