Gregory's ServerCan't wait for the inevitable "why is reutils GPLv2 only?" debate
|
2 comments
I actually would have preferred CC0, but I want companies to give back to my efforts, or pay me if they want to make a closed-source fork. I'm not a software freedom fanatic. |
I decided to go GPLv2 because GPLv3 is banned in a lot of places, and to be frank, there are good uses of DRM, like maintaining privacy or preventing someone from flashing a new firmware to your car and driving off with it.
No I don't like software patents or evil uses of DRM, but 1) companies won't jeopardise their patent portfolio on GPLv3 therefore it's irrelevant, 2) I don't really see it as a licence's job to define what is good or bad DRM.
There's also the questionable wisdom of allowing a disinterested third party to unilaterally change licence terms without consulting me, hence I don't like the "or later" clause either.
No debate please. I have had this discussion before with others. I made my choices, you make yours.
I decided to go GPLv2 because GPLv3 is banned in a lot of places, and to be frank, there are good uses of DRM, like maintaining privacy or preventing someone from flashing a new firmware to your car and driving off with it.
No I don't like software patents or evil uses of DRM, but 1) companies won't jeopardise their patent portfolio on GPLv3 therefore it's irrelevant, 2) I don't really see it as a licence's job to define what is good or bad DRM.