A GPL-enforcement suit against VMware

Posted Mar 8, 2015 23:40 UTC (Sun) by brouhaha (subscriber, #1698)
Parent article: A GPL-enforcement suit against VMware

Some people would rather that it were not done at all, seeing it as an incentive for companies to avoid GPL-licensed code.

Some people have the mistaken view that because the code is available online, they have the right to use it in whatever manner they like, license be damned. There's no reason for software authors to provide any incentive for such people to use their code. If the authors wanted people to be able to use it without GPL compliance, they would have offered it under a non-GPL license, or dual-licensed with a non-GPL license as an alternative.

The "Some people" in the quote are apparently not the authors of the code, so what they would rather have is of no consequence whatsoever. I'd rather have a pony, but that doesn't mean that the authors are obligated to provide me one.

A GPL-enforcement suit against VMware

Posted Mar 12, 2015 1:49 UTC (Thu) by ncm (guest, #165) [Link] (11 responses)

I know of quite a few companies pathologically afraid of GPL code (even LGPL) despite being fundamentally dependent on GPL programs such as Linux -- Apple, Google, and IBM among them. It is as if they adhere to a standard far more radical than is ascribed to Rosen et al. It would be very interesting to get (e.g. via discovery) copies of their reasoning for that fear. It might even make helpful amicus curiae content.

A GPL-enforcement suit against VMware

Posted Mar 12, 2015 4:08 UTC (Thu) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (10 responses)

Google is very willing to use and produce GPLv2 code, they are not willing to use GPLv3

In android they may be a bit more cautious, but that's based on the carrier's fears, not Google's

A GPL-enforcement suit against VMware

Posted Mar 12, 2015 11:57 UTC (Thu) by jra (subscriber, #55261) [Link] (9 responses)

The above statement is incorrect. Whilst Google prefers to release under the Apache license, GPLv3 is also widely used and code is released under it.

A GPL-enforcement suit against VMware

Posted Mar 13, 2015 1:17 UTC (Fri) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (8 responses)

Ok, I was referring to the licensing of external code and their willingness to incorporate it into their internal tools, based on the guidelines that they give to their programmers on what they have to do for code under different licenses.

A GPL-enforcement suit against VMware

Posted Mar 13, 2015 11:49 UTC (Fri) by jra (subscriber, #55261) [Link] (7 responses)

That is also incorrect. Google imports and uses code under GPLv3 every day. Just *stop* trying to spread your hate about the GPLv3 with untruths about usage you simply seem to be making up. I get it, you don't like it - but you don't have to keep posting the same thing again and again here.

"A zealot is someone who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."

A GPL-enforcement suit against VMware

Posted Mar 13, 2015 17:18 UTC (Fri) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (6 responses)

Google requires specific approval to import GPLv3 code

and where did you get that I hate GPLv3? I think it's a mistake, but I don't hate it.

I worked at Google for a while and I'm reporting what they told us in training.

A GPL-enforcement suit against VMware

Posted Mar 13, 2015 22:08 UTC (Fri) by jra (subscriber, #55261) [Link] (5 responses)

I work in Google's Open Source Programs Office reporting to Chris. I've *given* the training you're talking about. You are wrong. You need to pass review to import *any* open source code into Google, and GPLv3 is treated no differently than any other code under a copy left license.

Stop hijacking threads to make them about your personal hobby-horse of how much you dislike GPLv3. I'm sick of it. This thread is about the VMware lawsuit. Let's keep it on topic.

A GPL-enforcement suit against VMware

Posted Mar 13, 2015 22:18 UTC (Fri) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (4 responses)

calm down, I wasn't the one who accused Google of not liking the GPL, I actually spoke up to say that Google was not anti-GPL. I was defending google, not attacking anyone.

A GPL-enforcement suit against VMware

Posted Mar 20, 2015 17:53 UTC (Fri) by Del- (guest, #72641) [Link] (3 responses)

You said Google was anti-GPLv3, and got called on it. Moreover, mud slinging v3 hurts GPL in general, and a smart man like you should realise that.

A GPL-enforcement suit against VMware

Posted Mar 20, 2015 20:18 UTC (Fri) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (2 responses)

I don't agree that it's inappropriate to criticize GPLv3 "because it hurts GPL". For the record, I think Linus has it right and GPLv3 has too many shades of "I am altering our deal, pray that I don't alter it further". But I wasn't arguing that the GPLv3 is bad, I was correcting the statement "google hates GPL"

I came away from the google training understanding that GPLv2 was perfectly acceptable, GPLv3 somewhat acceptable, but going back and looking up the license on the project that I remember being used as an example of Google paying big bucks for an exception to the license, it turns out that the project in question is AGPLv3, not GPLv3. so at this point it could be that I had a bad instructer in my session, or I just remembered it wrong.

People see the lack of GPL code in Android and think that it means that Google in anti-GPL and that is very much not the case, that's just the Android project.

A GPL-enforcement suit against VMware

Posted Mar 21, 2015 20:43 UTC (Sat) by Del- (guest, #72641) [Link] (1 responses)

>I don't agree that it's inappropriate to criticize GPLv3 "because it hurts GPL".

Now that wasn't quite what you did.

>For the record, I think Linus has it right

And I think you should let Linus talk for himself, you are hardly a mind reader. Personally I think both him and RMS let their ego come in the way. However, I have yet to see anybody criticize v3 without twisting facts, and you are no exception. It is counterproductive and it creates some noise that I am sick and tired of.

A GPL-enforcement suit against VMware

Posted Apr 1, 2015 4:54 UTC (Wed) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]

Care to add some content to your post? I particularly like your implication that it's humanly impossible to criticize v3. You don't actually believe that, do you?