News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Why I replaced MIT with copyleft license for Nodemailer. Parent comment

Re:Why I replaced MIT with copyleft license for Nodemailer by wvenable on Thursday February 02, 2017 @05:49PM (#13555704)
All copyleft licenses have the same principle; to promote openness. This is explicitly not the same as "use it however they want".

I think the motivation to not have your open source code used in a closed source product that is sold for profit should be obvious.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why I replaced MIT with copyleft license for Nodemailer by 0mp on Thursday February 02, 2017 @05:56PM (#13555759)
Also, the motivation seems to be a desire for building a bigger community which gives back its improvements. ZeroMQ for example sticks to LGPL for the very reason - they believe that it is easier to build a community and discourage "dark forks" when software is licensed under GPL-like license. (See http://zeromq.org/area:faq#toc4).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why I replaced MIT with copyleft license for Nodemailer by williamstein on Thursday February 02, 2017 @06:59PM (#13556287)
They have tried hard for the last year it relicense zeromq under a much more liberals license, but have had trouble getting all permissions.
[ Parent | on HN ]