News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Copyleft and community licenses are not without merit, bu... by dmm on Friday December 21, 2018 @04:32PM (#18736849)
It was interesting reading this person's viewpoints but I think they misunderstand the point of copyleft licenses.

> They’re forcing a world view that everything should be free and shared like some sort of make-believe Star Trek future where money doesn’t exist.

Is a world where you are allowed to repair and modify your own house or car a "make-believe Star Trek future"? Asking to have insight and control over the software which plays an increasingly important role in our lives is not a fantasy to be dismissed.

> Ultimately, in my philosophy, copyleft represents real open source, despite what the OSI says. Copyleft is a restriction.

A typo? A restriction for you the creator perhaps, but for your users it represents the freedom to use, modify, and redistribute the software they use.

Re:Copyleft and community licenses are not without merit, bu... by z0r on Friday December 21, 2018 @05:03PM (#18737095)
Rather than copyleft being a Star Trek fantasy, one being restricted from modifying (fixing) software they use is the science fiction dystopia!
Re:Copyleft and community licenses are not without merit, bu... by pauldix on Friday December 21, 2018 @05:10PM (#18737154)
Ah, good catch on the typo. I meant the opposite of that, but so many edits messed it up.

I get the idea that copyleft gives people the freedom to see the code and modify, but the limitations it imposes for using that code in derivative works is what makes me think it's a utopian ideal.

Re:Copyleft and community licenses are not without merit, bu... by cyphar on Saturday December 22, 2018 @01:23AM (#18739287)
> I get the idea that copyleft gives people the freedom to see the code and modify, but the limitations it imposes for using that code in derivative works is what makes me think it's a utopian ideal.

The problem is you can't get the benefits without the cost. And all of the derivative works problems are political -- the issue is that companies don't want to (or can't for various reasons) give you their changes. Personally I view this as antisocial and shortsighted behaviour (when a company fails, the work in their fork is lost).

Though to be honest, most proprietary changes aren't very good. The GPL is just one more (political) hiccup that gives an incentive for companies to contribute upstream -- in addition to general out-of-tree problems.

Re:Copyleft and community licenses are not without merit, bu... by efaref on Friday December 21, 2018 @08:26PM (#18738273)
The limitations it imposes are the price.