269
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] apotheotic@beehaw.org 6 points 4 days ago

I misunderstood your initial point, I thought you were speaking against permissive/copyleft licenses generally. We agree with one another. Except in the "I can be sure that the technology and code will be freely shared" because just as bad actors can abuse a permissive license, bad actors (see: companies with enough money to just squash the legal case) can simply ignore a copyleft license. I think we 99% agree though and I love copyleft.

[-] SwooshBakery624@programming.dev 5 points 4 days ago

because just as bad actors can abuse a permissive license, bad actors

You are right, but with copyleft you at least have legal mechanisms to force the company to comply with the license. With MIT or BSD there aren't any, because permissive licences don't enforce any such restrictions.

I think we 99% agree though and I love copyleft.

Yup. And I love copyleft too.

[-] apotheotic@beehaw.org 2 points 3 days ago

Those legal mechanisms do exist in theory! But, as ever, if its you vs Microsoft, you can probably get fucked :(

[-] boonhet@lemmy.zip 4 points 4 days ago

Permissive is the opposite of copyleft. Permissive is "here's my code, do whatever the fuck you want", copyleft is "here's my code, you may use it but if your derivative work is available to other people then I dictate how it must be licensed"

this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2026
269 points (99.3% liked)

Opensource

7012 readers
89 users here now

A community for discussion about open source software! Ask questions, share knowledge, share news, or post interesting stuff related to it!

CreditsIcon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

⠀


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS