>>51697973
>profit

That's your problem

>>51697973
Google serves use linux and other open source tools
Image how much more costly their development had been if the creators had to but windows and play alk those licenses. Plus you can search the code for bugs or adjust the code to your needs.

>>51697973
Why should we protect the fact that air is free and must remain free and used only in certain ways that does not pollute or remove it from freely available environments forever?

How does that help anyone? I mean, nobody earns money from it then, everyone can only just use it... for free.

>>51699158
buy windows*
pay all*

I profit when I sell my GPL software. I sell GPL software because I believe it is unethical to distribute proprietary software. I also feel that I don't want to directly help people fork my software into proprietary software.

>>51697973
I get paid to write bsd licensed code. i don't get how people fail to understand how to make money with free software.
a company wants to use some software, needs some improvements, additions, whatever and pays a developer to write them and contributes the changes back.

>>51699174
PS: Even for the allowed corporate use, pumping air in and then out in sufficiently recyclable state again is cheapest.

Much as like what happened with the GPLv2, GPLv3 and all the other copyleft licenses used by corporate projects. They are *the cheapest modes of cooperation* and getting shit done on software shared between companies and also the public, ever,

>>51697973
I hate the gpl license: it's a fucking viral one. Oh, you used 1 line of gpl-licensed code in your project? Your whole project now has to be gpl.

People making stuff like db connectors gpl-licensed are fucking cancerous. Why make something for free and then prevent it from being used in projects that are too costly to be made free? That big project then needs to use something else that will probably not be as good and cost money on top of it, which just leads to a chain of software becoming more expensive and shitter.

Gpl actually kinda forces other software to either be gpl too (which you don't always want, as a dev) or to be doomed to be stuck with inferior shit costly libraries and such. It's basically
>muh seekrit club
for software and a ploy to spite people.

Fucking stallman bastard
>software should be free
>here, use this license that imposes restrictions on the freedom of whoever uses your software

>>51699478

> I hate the gpl license: it's a fucking viral one. Oh, you used 1 line of gpl-licensed code in your project? Your whole project now has to be gpl.
Well, don't use that line of code, make a connector that doesn't strictly depend on GPL'd code. Commit that under the GPL, do your own shit.

It's all in the fucking GPL.

>That big project then needs to use something else that will probably not be as good and cost money on top of it, which just leads to a chain of software becoming more expensive and shitter.
If it just adapts the GPL, it will be free, not costly. Get out of the cooperative ecosystem and go into the competitive one if you need your own little walled garden.

>>51699517
>Well, don't use that line of code, make a connector that doesn't strictly depend on GPL'd code. Commit that under the GPL, do your own shit.
>let's reinvent the wheel 10 times over and waste time doing that
>If it just adapts the GPL, it will be free, not costly
Uh no? It still costs time and manpower to develop so from a production perspective it won't be free no matter what, so it can't be given away for free either since that would just be a load of loss.

>>51699478
Protip: The GPL says one thing about usage of the licensed software because it isn't a usage license.

>>51699574
For one, it doesn't need to be free in production. You don't really need to make your money with selling software licenses or exclusive knowledge and access to intellectual monopolies.

Basically, you can publish your autonomous boat driving code while still selling autonomously driving boats, or taxi services with them.

It's a much better, more even market anyways, because competition can exist in that. With software patents and licenses, it often can't.

>>51699615
>Basically, you can publish your autonomous boat driving code while still selling autonomously driving boats, or taxi services with them.
What if I told you the code is all I make? I'm not in the fucking boat industry, I'm in the code industry.

Not all code can be made free because sometimes the code just is your product.

>>51699691
All code can be made free even when the code is just your product. Simply find a customer willing to pay your price at a profit. Any other customers willing to buy that exact same software is pure icing given that you've already made your profit.

>>51699691
Then you get hired by the boat industry or something to make their code. Simple.

Almost everyone else other than the IP lobby fags also never ends up with anything other than a money<->work trade-off.

>>51699478
>here, use this license that imposes restrictions on the freedom of whoever uses your software
The GPL doesn't restrict the *user's* freedom, protecting the *user's* freedom is its only purpose.

You might confuse that with the *developers* "freedom" to restrict user freedom.