Slashdot Mirror
MS-Funded Study Attacks GPL3 Draft Process
QCMBR writes "A new Microsoft-funded study by a Harvard Business School professor concludes that developers don't want extensive patent licensing requirements in the GPL3. There are significant problems with the study, however, especially given the very small sample size. 'Although 332 emails were sent to various developers, only 34 agreed to participate in the survey — an 11 percent response rate. Of the 34 developers who responded, many of them are associated with projects like Apache and PostgreSQL that don't even use the GPL.' Ars points out that the GPL3 draft editing and review process is highly transparent and inclusive 'to an extent that makes MacCormack's claims of under-representation seem difficult to accept given the small sample size of the study and the number of respondents who contribute to non-GPL projects.'"
"GPL has some pretty harsh restrictions on what the users of the code can do."
No. The GPL has no restrictions on what users of the code can do. The GPL isnt an EULA. The GPL is a copyright license, and as such only becomes relevant once you want to do something you would otherwise be forbidden to do by copyright law, ie, copy, modify and distribute.
"care about the people who only intend to use the compiled software."
Care about the people as in ensuring that they too have access to the code, should the software not perform the task they wish? Care about the people as in care about their right to share the software with friends if they enjoy it?
Caring about people takes many forms; sometimes it means denying others the ability to gain power and control over them.