A Year of GPLv3

javipas writes "GPLv3 and LGPLv3 were released one year ago, on 29 June 2007. Palamida, who tracks Open Source projects, has made a study of the current situation of these licenses along with AGPLv3, which was released later, in November. The number of projects that have made the transition to these licenses has grown over the last months, and it seems than AGPLv3 has captured a great interest lately. Black Duck Software, a company that tracks Open Source projects too, has made its own study with similar results, and although GPLv3 and its variants have a good adoption rate, the interviews published on the Palamida site (Stallman, Chris Di Bona) show that the acceptance of GPLv3 has still a long way to walk."

Comments

Re:Anyone see much of a difference?

[Timothy Brownawell]

It protects your work from being used in a tivo, but not creating a tivo. If the kernel went GPLv3 on the other hand, you'd have a big problem making any kind of tivo as

...the tivo makers would switch to using BSD, or something else with a license that doesn't infringe freedom 2 (freedom to redistribute).

Re:I've seen an effect

[Chemisor]

> No matter how good you think the intentions you have are. If *insert corporation
> here* wants your code they can take it and use it to create restrictions for the user.

Well, duh! The point is that I don't care. If they take my code and put restrictions on it, I still don't care: no matter what happens, I still have my code. Anyone who wants to get my code can still get my code. What they can't get is the *insert corporation here*'s code that they added to my code, and the one very important point the GPL camp misses is that only a communist would lay claim to that code. The corporation wrote it, it's theirs. They can keep it, or sell it, or give it away. But it is immoral for me to force them to give it away. I can do what I want with my free software; I have no right to dictate others what to do with the code they write, even if it is using my code that they legally obtained from me. When I release free software, it's free software. Period. No friggin' GPL strings attached.

Re:GPLv2 and GPLv3 have the same spirit

[synthespian]

I'd *really* like to see all you GPL addicts try to run a small firm selling embedded software/instrumentation/whatever that's GPLed - and having to give all your code to the competition.

Oh, wait, you don't want yo do that. You only want the service model where you work for someone else. You dream of being the salary men (web devs notwithstanding - not all software is a web app).

The GPL model is utterly useless in areas where hardware and software go together.

You are clueless. You no think. Get off the intertubes.