[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xouvert-general] License question

From: Massimo Santoro
Subject: Re: [Xouvert-general] License question
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 05:56:00 +0200
User-agent: KMail/1.5.3

> Perhaps code the code could be put under a "dual license".  But when I
> read the xfree license it seemed to me to be more "open" than the
> GPL--but that was just a glance.

The freeness of the X11 license is undoubtful. Though this freeness allows 
everyone to pick up your code and do whatever. This might sound really good 
both for the users and the developers (including hardware companies 
developers), but I think not so much for a GOOD(TM) development.

GPL, OSL or other "spreading" licenses in fact guarantee that your work will 
be free, public, publicized. This doesn't always happen with "non-copyleft" 
software. There's also the incentive to partecipate actively to the project, 
knowing since the beginning that your code would not be "stolen" by anyone.

Also a hardware (3D) company, releasing with GPL/OSL, would be "happy" to 
actively contribute to the project and at the same time they would be sure 
that noone would "steal" their contribution. If other companies then decide 
that those pieces of code are interesting, they might use them of course, 
still only with the GPL license and therefore making the code available.
ATI Technologies used to contribute a lot to the XFree86 project thanks to 
single persons. Maybe if X was using a "spreading" license things would have 
been different.

I am sorry to be so dramatic/drastic, but I would never contribute to a 
project where any big or small company might just look inside and decide "oh 
what a nice job have they done! let's use it for our closed-source project". 

The code has to remain freely available to everyone if one decides to make it 

Massimo Santoro

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]