In case you were wondering, using GPL licenses is how I signal to contributors my promise that the software is and shall always be open source, because I'm legally obligated to keep it that way.

That's what the GPL is for. Religious zealotry for permissive licenses is stupid.

@sir Permissive licenses are quite just throwing your software away and not caring, it fits okay for small programs that people caring about it could take over.

That said with the GPL (and stuff like the CDDL) there is still the issue of copyright assignment, which is something I don't accept at all (and haven't verified but might be illegal in Europe or France).
And of course GNU says to assign it to the FSF for allowing them to have legal authority, justified that it's for protecting your rights, sure the FSF is probably not going to do a Sun→Oracle but it could go down.

@lanodan I'll assign copyright to the FSF just as soon as they use it even once to enforce the license

Until then I'll keep it under my own name so I can file the lawsuit when the time comes

@sir @lanodan Maybe you can talk with Conservancy. I'm not sure they even accept copyright assignments, but they certainly do know their way around FOSS licensing enforcement.

I am pretty sure SFC has sued at least one company that refused to comply with license terms after months of negotiations. I don't know whether Bradley Kuhn is still active in federated socnets, but he was active on Identica back in its heyday.

@lanodan Copyright assignments to the FSF contain a clause that voids the contract if they make the contribution non-free. As it was explained to me, it was added in case there ever was a hostile takeover of the FSF.

Not all GNU packages choose to assign copyright to the FSF (that's up to the package author).

@mikegerwitz @lanodan Presumably involving a definition of "non-free" separate from the FSF's definition of free software, right? (Given it's meant for a hostile takeover scenario)

@jfred @mikegerwitz Can you even do an hostile takeover of a foundation that easily?

I'm more worried on what-if the FSF doesn't exists anymore and you have to file a lawsuit.

@sir "because I'm legally obligated to keep it that way"
That is only true if others contributed to the code under GPL. Otherwise, you could change license (but it would only really effect new versions, since you can not revoke GPL on already released stuff).

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!