| did you or did you not write these sentences? > Other than an appeal to their sense of morality (which only works if they happen to be a Stallman disciple) > what's their incentive to use it? It's simply demanding more from those who are already giving. I think you meant more than simply "why I choose not to license my own project as GPL" you're actually bashing on GPL because you either - are ignorant of what GPL license says - have an agenda and/or are paid to spread FUD - all of the above If I want to be charitable I would say that the last hypothesis is that you are not aware of what you write. EDIT: you also rote > Nobody is "afraid" of copyleft, that's a rhetorical device you're using to discredit those who disagree with you Which is not true, a lot of businesses are afraid of copyleft, in fact at work not many people can publish their code under a copyleft license, because the mainstream mindset is that code is an asset and keeping it secret gives companies an advantage. Which clearly is not the case, because most of the code is simply a rewrite - usually bad - of something that already exists in the copyleft World. Everyone working in the field knows that. So it's a decision based on fear not on risk assessment. The company I work for is specialized in risk assessment and even they cannot escape the myth that code must be kept secret or the competition would steal it. I wonder what competitor would steal that pile of garbage that only works under very specific requirements, which are mostly there because 40 years of legacy and incompetence. You seem to have an idea of copyleft (GPL in particular) that is far from what it is and it only exists in your mind. |
Think what you want. Nobody else was confused by my meaning.
> have and agenda and are paid to spread FUD
LMAO you guys are fucking lunatics. Have a nice night.