Replying to an earlier post

In my opinion, I just don’t understand permissive licenses. For example, with FreeBSD’s license, companies can essentially “steal” the hard-earned efforts and use them to enrich themselves. For example, FreeBSD could have been a gaming OS, as the PlayStation’s OS is FreeBSD. However, they didn’t give anything back to the community.

Copyleft licenses, on the other hand, require companies to contribute any changes they make to the code back to the community so that it benefits the community as a whole. In this case, there’s no “stealing”, companies need to respect the community’s efforts by giving back.

That’s my two cents anyway.

Replying to @⁨mereo@piefed.ca⁩

To play devil’s advocate for a second - no-one is stealing anything, the code is still right where it was. If I willingly give someone a sandwich, did they steal it? Of course not.

There was a reason that PS chose FreeBSD, and it was because of the licence. If FreeBSD used the GPL then PS wouldn’t have used it, hence there never would have been a FreeBSD gaming OS either way.

Replying to @⁨Rossphorus@lemmy.world⁩

Exactly, it’s a defining feature of the project. They don’t care how you use the code as long as you use it. It’s just a different philosophy.

BSDs are just doing their own thing and whether they benefit or not from others using their work is not really a concern.

Take OpenSSH, it’s used by virtually every operating system and just exists to be used. It’s a great contribution to software even if OpenBSD is a tiny marginal thing used by only those that need it. They are cool with that.

Edited ⁨⁨Jul⁩ ⁨28⁩, ⁨2026⁩, ⁨23:25⁩⁩en