On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 21:38:19 +0100 (CET), Hubert Feyrer <hubert@feyrer.de> wrote:
>   * A general consequence when putting code under the BSD license or
>     releasing new code based on existing BSD-licensed code is
>     that the code can be kept closed. E.g. when shipping hardware, there is
>     no need to add the source.
> 
>   * In contrast, when you put new code under the GPL, or write code
>     based on a program released under the GPL, it is mandatory that you
>     release the full source of all your changes. Many big companies have
>     been bitten by this with Linux, see http://www.gpl-violations.org/ to
>     find that prominent companies like Siemens, ASUS, Sitecom, Gigabyte and
>     many others are affected of this (aparently?) difficult to follow
>     requirement of the GPL.

Isn't it strange that it seems like people think the GPL is more
business friendly than BSD? Someone needs to explain this to me.

Honestly, I feel like the reason people like GPL is out of paranoia
about what people might do if the "give" their code away (in the BSD
definition of "give"). As if this is stimulating competition against
oneself. I think there is some sense that if they "give" to the GPL,
at least they know what they are giving to since it sort of feels more
like a single, possibly non "exploitable", thing. With BSD, you never
know if someone is going to grab it, fork it (internally) and then
make a sell-able product.

BUT, (big BUT), does this actually happen? Can anyone quantify this?
If I'm company A and I'm feeling generous and add to the BSD source,
does this mean company B pops up, uses "my" (my?) intellectual
contribution and use it against me? I don't think it does.

Isn't this kind of a ridiculous thing to be afraid of though? What
stops ANYONE from doing this? Isn't the fact that anyone can do it
enough deterrence to not worry about it? Not that it's bad, but it's
hard to make dollars from something everyone else already has. You
gotta add value. Which you can do with BSD.

There are very fundamental differences here in philosophy as we all
know, but the choices business makes about using one versus the other
just confuses me. It seems to me that it makes sense to make a few
bucks along the way. When companies decide that some function is not
worth maintaining themselves, and the community would do a better job,
they let it go with BSD. Or something.

Now I'm more confused than when I started.

I'm an american living in a free market, and I can't make sense of the
GPL personally.

Andy