Difference between revisions of "Licensing/software"
(Add section on mixed licensing) |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
== Assignment == | == Assignment == | ||
Since only the copyright holder can initiate an enforcement claim, developers are urged to assign their works to a larger 'consortium' such as the Free Software Foundation. See [[Assignment]] | Since only the copyright holder can initiate an enforcement claim, developers are urged to assign their works to a larger 'consortium' such as the Free Software Foundation. See [[Assignment]] | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
== Popularity / Trends == | == Popularity / Trends == | ||
; What are the licenses used by projects on GitHub? : https://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2013/lcs-slides-aaronw/#/begin | ; What are the licenses used by projects on GitHub? : https://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2013/lcs-slides-aaronw/#/begin | ||
| − | |||
; Which licenses are used the most? : Promulgated in 1991, GPLv2 is still after 23 years in service, the most widely used free software license of any type. <ref>https://www.blackducksoftware.com/resources/data/top-20-open-source-licenses</ref> | ; Which licenses are used the most? : Promulgated in 1991, GPLv2 is still after 23 years in service, the most widely used free software license of any type. <ref>https://www.blackducksoftware.com/resources/data/top-20-open-source-licenses</ref> | ||
Revision as of 17:12, 5 April 2016
The Copyleft movement started by RMS with the GPL license is the pursuit of an ethical goal in the legal framework that exists. There are many challenges impeding the movement. One is the overwhelming lack of ethics in business. I don't mean to say that business is criminal. Rather, that ethics in business as it is taught, codified legally, and put into practice in the corporate environment place it so low on the priorities list that it rarely becomes a focus or even a deciding factor. All companies claim to 'care', but very few show that in their commitment to users, customers, employees, partners, and society at large by using the GPL. In fact, when the GPL was modified to try to protect individual freedoms in the face of new technical realities, the biggest effect seems to be that companies found new ways to exploit the GPL for their own gain. If the GPL were a lifeboat, the general business/legal climate is a monsoon/hurricane like the red spot on Jupiter: massive and undying. At the other end of this movement is the user which it's designed to protect. You would think that the user, motivated by their own self-interest in protecting their own freedoms would be manning the oars, and bailing out the boat. But the reality is that 99% of the users don't know that there is a problem; or that they can do anything about it. Users blindly and willingly consume all manner of proprietary software which strikes at the movement like a giant anchor tossed overboard with a chain that is too short. More recently, user apathy has been compounded by a shift in the general cultural attitudes brought on by the pervasiveness of personal computing. Users are frustrated with the permission economy. They would be happy if copyright were severely limited or abolished. For developers, it's simple to post code on places like github without a license (or the 'wrong' license) - weakening the GPL. The paradox is that the GPL relies on copyright to protect user freedoms.
Assignment[edit | edit source]
Since only the copyright holder can initiate an enforcement claim, developers are urged to assign their works to a larger 'consortium' such as the Free Software Foundation. See Assignment
Popularity / Trends[edit | edit source]
- What are the licenses used by projects on GitHub?
- https://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2013/lcs-slides-aaronw/#/begin
- Which licenses are used the most?
- Promulgated in 1991, GPLv2 is still after 23 years in service, the most widely used free software license of any type. [1]
Good Reads[edit | edit source]
- Armin Ronacher http://lucumr.pocoo.org/2013/7/23/licensing/
