• AlmaemberTheGreat@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    4 years ago

    I guess it’s capitalism in action though, such a beautiful system! those who make everything transparent, make software open source, respect user freedom, put it out there for free will struggle and don’t get rewarded, while some motherfucker companies who close source their software, fill it with spyware, design it to be addictive so they can show more ads, get to have all the money. totally fair!

    That’s why I recommend the (A)GPL. Especially with AGPL, they always have to give users the source.

    • Ephera@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 years ago

      Yep, and as an added bonus, many companies react very allergic to the AGPL. As in, use of code under AGPL may very well be prohibited.

        • Ephera@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 years ago

          To be honest, the “many” might be wrong. I also only really know of Google and the company that I work at, which is a larger non-IT company.

          I sort of just assume that it would be common, because in these larger companies no one cares enough about individual IT projects to generally accept the risk of a license violation.
          It’s also just a pain in the ass for such a larger company to keep track of all the different licenses that end up in one product, so completely banning the most dangerous licenses may simply be a sane business decision.