I’ve looked at some of the Copilot threads but am unable to follow the issue. Can someone summarize what the issue is with Copilot and why a BSD license would have been significant for the code?
“I wish I could have licensed the Id source code releases as BSD”
11–20 of 468 posts
Re: “I wish I could have licensed the Id source code releases as BSD”
#12so, we all have the privilege to read the DOOM source code because the GPL exists and was compatible with the business needs of Id Soft, as well as JC’s vision, is how i’m reading this.
You would've had the privilege of reading the source with BSD too, but the GPL prevents a variety of things from happening so its not as free as the BSD License. If you want to read into something - he was bullied into using the GPL and not the BSD license.
Neither license gives you the right to see the source. GPL only gives you the right if the software is distributed to you, and im pretty sure BSD gives you no rights in that regard.
Re: “I wish I could have licensed the Id source code releases as BSD”
#13https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses
BSD licenses are a family of permissive free software licenses, imposing minimal restrictions on the use and distribution of covered software. This is in contrast to copyleft licenses, which have share-alike requirements. The original BSD license was used for its namesake, the Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD), a Unix-like operating system. The original version has since been revised, and its descendants are referred to as modified BSD licenses.
-
Discussion on bsd vs gpl:
Re: “I wish I could have licensed the Id source code releases as BSD”
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
You would've had the privilege of reading the source with BSD too, but the GPL prevents a variety of things from happening so its not as free as the BSD License. If you want to read into something - he was bullied into using the GPL and not the BSD license.
Neither license gives you the right to see the source. GPL only gives you the right if the software is distributed to you, and im pretty sure BSD gives you no rights in that regard.
Sure, but you're claiming the GPL enabled "reading the source" which is patently false.
Re: “I wish I could have licensed the Id source code releases as BSD”
#15so, we all have the privilege to read the DOOM source code because the GPL exists and was compatible with the business needs of Id Soft, as well as JC’s vision, is how i’m reading this.
You would've had the privilege of reading the source with BSD too, but the GPL prevents a variety of things from happening so its not as free as the BSD License. If you want to read into something - he was bullied into using the GPL and not the BSD license.
I would never have had the opportunity to read the DOOM source if JC had insisted on using BSD, because, as JC tweets, his business partners at Id soft would not have gone for it. ipso facto the GPL + Id + JC are responsible for this privilege being available to us all.
Re: “I wish I could have licensed the Id source code releases as BSD”
#16This headline is a bit sensationalist. His tweet at the end says - "I'm still supportive of lots of GPL work, but I don't think the restrictions helped in this particular case." He also says - "but tons of opportunities to just copy-paste-modify were lost due to license concerns". It appears that the goal John was shooting for was to have as broad an impact by having the code being reused in as many situations as pos…
Counter point: I don't think it's sensational. I interpreted his words directly as he wishes he gone a different direction given what he knows now. At the time he thought GPL was the best move, and now how he doesn't. HNTitle at the time of my reply: "John Carmack wishes he'd used the BSD license instead of the GPL"
He also said in the thread that his partners wouldn't have gone for it, so he may have thought BSD was better back then too, but went with what he could do.
Releasing the engine code at all was a big deal back then, and inspired some others to do so, but others sometimes had more restrictive than GPL licenses; GPL is certainly better than a license prohibiting commercial use.
Re: “I wish I could have licensed the Id source code releases as BSD”
#17This headline is a bit sensationalist. His tweet at the end says - "I'm still supportive of lots of GPL work, but I don't think the restrictions helped in this particular case." He also says - "but tons of opportunities to just copy-paste-modify were lost due to license concerns". It appears that the goal John was shooting for was to have as broad an impact by having the code being reused in as many situations as pos…
No, the main point still stands that he wished that he had used the other license. Sensationalist implies that some accuracy is being sacrificed.
Re: “I wish I could have licensed the Id source code releases as BSD”
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
You would've had the privilege of reading the source with BSD too, but the GPL prevents a variety of things from happening so its not as free as the BSD License. If you want to read into something - he was bullied into using the GPL and not the BSD license.
I would never have had the opportunity to read the DOOM source if JC had insisted on using BSD, because, as JC tweets, his business partners at Id soft would not have gone for it. ipso facto the GPL + Id + JC are responsible for this privilege being available to us all.
The relevant implication in it hypothetically having been BSD is that he would have convinced his partners, not that its usage would have made the project never happen.
Re: “I wish I could have licensed the Id source code releases as BSD”
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
You would've had the privilege of reading the source with BSD too, but the GPL prevents a variety of things from happening so its not as free as the BSD License. If you want to read into something - he was bullied into using the GPL and not the BSD license.
I would never have had the opportunity to read the DOOM source if JC had insisted on using BSD, because, as JC tweets, his business partners at Id soft would not have gone for it. ipso facto the GPL + Id + JC are responsible for this privilege being available to us all.
Incorrect, there is zero about the BSD license that would've prevented you from reading the source if it was released with the Free-er BSD license.
Re: “I wish I could have licensed the Id source code releases as BSD”
#20This headline is a bit sensationalist. His tweet at the end says - "I'm still supportive of lots of GPL work, but I don't think the restrictions helped in this particular case." He also says - "but tons of opportunities to just copy-paste-modify were lost due to license concerns". It appears that the goal John was shooting for was to have as broad an impact by having the code being reused in as many situations as pos…
> It appears that the goal John was shooting for was to have as broad an impact by having the code being reused in as many situations as possible. On this metric, yes BSD would have been a superior choice. You basically made the point on why using the BSD license would've been superior... There are a lot of things the GPL prevents and Carmack is spot on about it.
For the particular metric John cares about, yes definitely. But there are other metrics out there by which GPL would have been a superior choice.