Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The users that can't use the GPL are often commercial in my experience. In that case I'd rather dual license than change to MIT (or similar).

You want it for free, give something back. (Is my thinking)




Fair 'nuff. I support that.

I'm not particularly interested in getting paid. My stuff will never be the "magic beans" that will turn some moribund idea into a unicorn. It's just "window dressing," or simple extensions that will help to improve the quality of the software.

It's mostly "brand reinforcement" and portfolio material. I want people to use it, and am willing to remove any obstacles.

I know that's unusual, but that's how I roll. It's a labor of love.

The infrastructure project that I wrote is designed for as many people as possible to use. We don't care whether or not someone wants to try using it to make money (good luck with that). It saves lives.

But, back to the original topic, if I had released software with a particular coercive license, and some corporation then went and used it against that license, I would probably be pissed. Not sure if I'd be pissed enough to hire an attack lawyer, though. I don't think I'm that dedicated.


I try not to use GPL software out of principle, but it's hard not to use Linux and GNU coreutils. I wish OpenBSD was as popular as Linux.


Well, you have a completely different perspective on software to me then.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: