A discussion on GPL compliance
A discussion on GPL compliance
Posted Nov 17, 2016 17:58 UTC (Thu) by GoodMirek (guest, #101902)Parent article: A discussion on GPL compliance
I think every GPL compliance effort is fine, even McHardy's. Not complying is act of huge disrespect to those who decided to make the world better by publishing under GPL.
Thanks to McHardy, offenders might be more motivated to comply once approached by SFC. Also, McHardy's model is financially sustainable, what might not be the case for SFC.
If you are a volunteer contributor, donating your time to GPL software, are you ready to also fund SFC for the sake of the license enforcement or you prefer such effort was more proactive and self-sufficient or you prefer to just resign on the GPL enforcement altogether?
In my view GPL licensed software has become widespread enough even without the contributors who might have been lost in case of stricter GPL enforcement. Non-complying companies started to modify GPL software because it was good enough, not the opposite way.
Thanks to McHardy, offenders might be more motivated to comply once approached by SFC. Also, McHardy's model is financially sustainable, what might not be the case for SFC.
If you are a volunteer contributor, donating your time to GPL software, are you ready to also fund SFC for the sake of the license enforcement or you prefer such effort was more proactive and self-sufficient or you prefer to just resign on the GPL enforcement altogether?
In my view GPL licensed software has become widespread enough even without the contributors who might have been lost in case of stricter GPL enforcement. Non-complying companies started to modify GPL software because it was good enough, not the opposite way.