Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dual-licensing works for MySQL but it may not work that well for smaller projects that are easier for company to re-implement from scratch. There's a possibility that GPL may be too high price for company to pay, and it's a price, too; you as a developer pay it when you choose GPL over BSD. The purpose of my previous comment was to point that out.
I don't understand what you're suggesting the downside here is. They might decide not to take my code, lock it up in a proprietary system and profit from it without me getting anything out of it? How am I harmed by them not doing all that?
Why I use GPL - Zed Shaw
11–16 of 16 posts
Re: Why I use GPL - Zed Shaw
#12The guy must be damn sure about how cool his projects are, because there's a situation where your project is cool enough for company to use but they won't because of GPL. It would probably work with startups (they're flexible and in a hurry — they'll take the coolest thing around without a second thought), but it may not work with bigger companies. Quite contrary, I believe that big companies tend to use software lic…
>...there's a situation where your project is cool enough for company to use but they won't because of GPL. He obviously realizes that. From the article: >I would actually rather nobody use my software than be in a situation where everyone is using my gear and nobody is admitting it.
Re: Why I use GPL - Zed Shaw
#13That post is strange regarding its use of licenses and implications, and also is probably some years old (it is hard to say, without a date / timestamp in it). a) The GPL does not enforce "giving back" for server software, if that software is only running on servers but not provided for download. The Affero GPL [1] is meant to close this "gap". b) Lamson 1.0, released almost two years ago [2], is actually licensed BS…
"That was in 2004. Five years ago."
Re: Why I use GPL - Zed Shaw
#14I would like to see high profile developers like Zed and Chris Granger fund more projects using services like Kickstarter (as Chris did for Light Table). People who do useful work deserve to be paid for it, and this is one good approach for well known developers.
Re: Why I use GPL - Zed Shaw
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand what you're suggesting the downside here is. They might decide not to take my code, lock it up in a proprietary system and profit from it without me getting anything out of it? How am I harmed by them not doing all that?
If your code was used by some company you may use that fact on the interview or to promote your project further, but if you are using GPL you are risking the chance to do so.
You can't even "use it on the interview"†, because they just took it silently and didn't tell you they're using it.
† Incidentally, I hope never to interview with this hypothetical company that isn't willing to pay for value-providing software but would find the fact that I gave it away for free highly compelling.
Re: Why I use GPL - Zed Shaw
#16That post is strange regarding its use of licenses and implications, and also is probably some years old (it is hard to say, without a date / timestamp in it). a) The GPL does not enforce "giving back" for server software, if that software is only running on servers but not provided for download. The Affero GPL [1] is meant to close this "gap". b) Lamson 1.0, released almost two years ago [2], is actually licensed BS…
It looks like the post is from 2009: "That was in 2004. Five years ago."