zlacker

>>lostms+(OP)
That is exactly why I am not open sourcing my .NET bindings for TensorFlow.

>>lostms+a
I don't know the details of your project, but what if you open sourced under the GPL?

I feels as though the world has soured on the GPL in recent years, but whenever I see this type of sentiment—that open sourcing work is just a gift from small developers to big tech companies, or something thereabouts—I think, wouldn't the GPL solve that problem?

Sure, big companies can still use GPL'd code, but they're forced to give back as much as they take, which is exactly the outcome you want.

(This doesn't necessarily apply to the situation with AppGet, however.)

>>Wowfun+k8
By Eben Moglen's own admission[0], the GPL has never been successfully enforced in a court of law, even against criminal infringers.

It seems toothless to me. A relic from a byegone era when companies cared about ethical behavior.

[0] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html

>>na85+Oc
The GPL has been used successfully in courts of law. It’s not common as most violators just open source when called out, or settle when sued, but it has worked before. A famous example is D-Link using the Linux kernel in their routers. After a lawsuit in Germany, D-Link had to release their changes.[0]

I don’t understand this idea that a license that the author willingly released his code under is unenforceable, but EULAs are?

[0]: https://web.archive.org/web/20141007073104/http://gpl-violat...

>>colejo+Se
Of course with all/most US routers generally taking only signed ROMs, it's mostly useless to even have the code.

I wish they'd just create something closer to tomato than the flashy, less useful interfaces.

>>tracke+ej
That problem is called TiVoization. It’s addressed with the 3rd version of the GPL. Sadly, Linus is adamantly against that clause.

>>colejo+Uo
> Linus is adamantly against that clause.

oh i didnt know he was adamant against the clause - i thought that he didn't want to force it upon the many existing users of linux.