Banning GPL articles
-
++ I tend to like GPL, or Creative Commons or whatever, and I see a great deal of ugly feedback coming if a ban is made. Unless it is made very clear that all code submitted to code project is to be used in any possible way. Banning a single license seems strange.
I like GPL and use it with LGPL, too. I think it's not a good idea to ban a single license. It should be better to clearly underline the license of the code in every article everyone provide. I think that if you publish your code it's your own business to decide which license should apply to your code and the user (me for example) is forced to use the license you choose. Stefano
-
I think the ugly feedback will be counterbalanced by long-term overall realization that GPL isn't an all-embracing or all-embraced silver bullet. It'll get people thinking "maybe GPL wasn't made by God".
It's not CodeProject's purpose, nor in CodeProject's interests to prove that GPL wasn't made by God. The question is whether protecting ignorant programmers outweighs the negative feedback.
-
If no license is specified I think it's safe to default to the "found it on the Internet" license and let the applicable regional laws do their thing.
In the US and many other countries, software is copyrighted by default. Without a license, you have no right to use it.
-
It's not CodeProject's purpose, nor in CodeProject's interests to prove that GPL wasn't made by God. The question is whether protecting ignorant programmers outweighs the negative feedback.
Maybe not, but it's certainly something to consider in regards to the concern about negative feedback. The question then becomes whether protecting ignorant programmers outweighs the risk of negative feedback outweighing positive feedback. Keeping in mind that GPL's arguably malevolent viral nature is the reason CP would be killing GPL articles, anyone who isn't blinded by GPL's promises of freedom should recognize the justification.
-
How would you all feel if we banned GPL licenced code on The Code Project? 1 = bad idea, 5 = good idea
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-10!! :mad: I think that if a developer is too stupid to read the article in full and see that the code is released under the GPL then that is their or their company’s problem. Sounds to me like you’re trying to create a "Nanny" website. GPL code doesn't have to be copied. God forbid that a developer could actually read some code and not write their own implementation of it instead of getting through their career copying and pasting code. Although it has to be asked why developers are releasing code samples (I'm not talking about full apps) under GPL. This also shows ignorance that they could have picked BSD which I would have thought is a much better license for code samples.
Oh, uh, good question. Now technically speaking, uhh, let's say, put me down as a... 'Whatever'?
-
In the US and many other countries, software is copyrighted by default. Without a license, you have no right to use it.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't a copyright just say that you're not allowed to claim ownership; not that you're not allowed to use it?
-
How would you all feel if we banned GPL licenced code on The Code Project? 1 = bad idea, 5 = good idea
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-
How would you all feel if we banned GPL licenced code on The Code Project? 1 = bad idea, 5 = good idea
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
No text - nothing to see here, move on....
-- Jeff Dickey jdickey@seven-sigma.com Seven Sigma Software and Services Phone/SMS: +65 9360 1820 FOAF: http://www.seven-sigma.com/foaf.rdf Yahoo! IM: jeff_dickey ICQ: 8053918 Tencent QQ: 30302349 -- If you can't reach me by any of these, one of us may be permanently offline -- I use and recommend GNU Privacy Guard to authenticate and secure email messages! Public key: Download from public servers - Key ID EBCCBD6C Fingerprint: Fingerprint: EC0A A53B 3FF3 043B 9C11 7006 55A6
-
How would you all feel if we banned GPL licenced code on The Code Project? 1 = bad idea, 5 = good idea
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
No. We use GPL code in our applications. (Though to be fair we are in a different world to most of the Microsoft users on CP.)
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Andy Brummer wrote:
Watson's law: As an online discussion of cars grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving the Bugatti Veyron approaches one.
-
How would you all feel if we banned GPL licenced code on The Code Project? 1 = bad idea, 5 = good idea
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
I also think that the GPL kinda misses the objective of this website. I understand that when you're building a system, you don't want to put those tens of thousands of lines of code and coffee cups in the public domain, but for a small article in a site intended to share code with other people, the GPL is too much. Those articles should default to Public Domain or some other permissive Creative Commons license. Some articles however aren't explaining just detailing a couple classes, they're actually explaining a larger framework or library, and for such complex frameworks, a license could be more carefully chosen. How about LGPL? If I recall correctly, you're allowed to use LGPL code in your project without tainting the rest of the project, right?
"Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes." - Edsger Dijkstra
-
How would you all feel if we banned GPL licenced code on The Code Project? 1 = bad idea, 5 = good idea
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't a copyright just say that you're not allowed to claim ownership; not that you're not allowed to use it?
The author who wrote the code owns it. Even if he publishes the code, you may not use it unless he gives you the permission to do so. Remember that a license is an agreement between the author and the user. The user is free to not accept this agreement (e.g. if he does not like restrictions specified in the license), but then he is left with no license; and no license means no right to use the code.
Wikipedia on copyright:
Copyright is a set of exclusive rights that regulate the use of a particular expression of an idea or information.
Remember that copyright was invented for book printers. The author has the exclusive rights on the work; no one else may make copies of it (in the software world: copy=use) unless he receives/buys a license from the author.
-
-10!! :mad: I think that if a developer is too stupid to read the article in full and see that the code is released under the GPL then that is their or their company’s problem. Sounds to me like you’re trying to create a "Nanny" website. GPL code doesn't have to be copied. God forbid that a developer could actually read some code and not write their own implementation of it instead of getting through their career copying and pasting code. Although it has to be asked why developers are releasing code samples (I'm not talking about full apps) under GPL. This also shows ignorance that they could have picked BSD which I would have thought is a much better license for code samples.
Oh, uh, good question. Now technically speaking, uhh, let's say, put me down as a... 'Whatever'?
:(It takes time to rewrite an implementation. For example, if I found this great article about yet another ORM framework, wouldn't it defeat the purpose if I went to write my own ORM framework based on the ideas of that article?:doh: I understand it's an exercice with some academic value,:^) but when you're being paid 12€ per hour, or when you have an actual application to finish in time,:rose: it's so much more convenient to download the source code and add it to your project: instead of spending a couple days to a couple weeks coding something, I just spend three hours reading the article and the example project to understand how I'm going to use that code.:rolleyes: Of course, some people are actually going to write their own ORM framework, and those people will read the code, take inspiration, and write their own implementation.:-D I too think that developpers releasing code samples under GPL don't know what GPL is. They probably think that since every open source app is released under GPL, he should the same so his source code can be used by everyone!:~
"Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes." - Edsger Dijkstra
-
:(It takes time to rewrite an implementation. For example, if I found this great article about yet another ORM framework, wouldn't it defeat the purpose if I went to write my own ORM framework based on the ideas of that article?:doh: I understand it's an exercice with some academic value,:^) but when you're being paid 12€ per hour, or when you have an actual application to finish in time,:rose: it's so much more convenient to download the source code and add it to your project: instead of spending a couple days to a couple weeks coding something, I just spend three hours reading the article and the example project to understand how I'm going to use that code.:rolleyes: Of course, some people are actually going to write their own ORM framework, and those people will read the code, take inspiration, and write their own implementation.:-D I too think that developpers releasing code samples under GPL don't know what GPL is. They probably think that since every open source app is released under GPL, he should the same so his source code can be used by everyone!:~
"Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes." - Edsger Dijkstra
Well as a developer working in a team of 3 developers who have to support a large client base and develop our product at the same time I would suggest that the time it would take to re-implement the code, if required, would only be about the same as trying to write your own. I personally would love to know how many Proprietary windows based applications are actually infringing on the GPL. Funny how the windows movers and shakers are always shouting about how linux and OSS infringes it's patents but they would ignore a call to audit their code for GPL code!! Unfortunatley the developer culture of today is to copy and paste a solution instead of writing one. Perhaps instead of banning code or articles released under GPL Code project could run an article on non-proprietry license's to educate the windows based developer world! -- modified at 6:36 Thursday 22nd November, 2007
Oh, uh, good question. Now technically speaking, uhh, let's say, put me down as a... 'Whatever'?
-
How would you all feel if we banned GPL licenced code on The Code Project? 1 = bad idea, 5 = good idea
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
5 good idea or put thm in a special section
-
How would you all feel if we banned GPL licenced code on The Code Project? 1 = bad idea, 5 = good idea
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
The main reason I found, joined, and contributed to this site is for the purpose of sharing code and ideas. The viral nature of the GPL restricts code sharing, which riles against the very purpose of this site! I think the BSD license is the best choice to meet the goals of this site. The basic premise is that anyone can use the code for anything, as long as due credit is given. One possible solution would be to introduce license selection when submitting an article. The two choices would be a "CP" license that is based on BSD, or the GPL for those who insist on using it. Then provide a filter that flags GPL articles with a different color (preferably red) or with an icon (similar to the "new" icon) so that people have a priori knowledge and cannot complain later that they "didn't know".
-- Paul
-
How would you all feel if we banned GPL licenced code on The Code Project? 1 = bad idea, 5 = good idea
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
I'm in - but only if we follow through with the plan: acquire world dominance, so we can ban it forever and everywhere. ;) Seriosuly: GPL would be ok IF people understood what it stands for. I'd prefer a general guideline rather than singleing out one specifc crap of a licence. However, in legal, general isn't simple. Do you see an option of "education"? E.g. if you are using a drop-down box for the most common licences, don't include GPL, but have a link "why is GPL not included?" OTOH, banning GPL is simpler, and will amount to the same. There will be a FAQ, and that's it. What do you think about LGPL?
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
No text - nothing to see here, move on....
-- Jeff Dickey jdickey@seven-sigma.com Seven Sigma Software and Services Phone/SMS: +65 9360 1820 FOAF: http://www.seven-sigma.com/foaf.rdf Yahoo! IM: jeff_dickey ICQ: 8053918 Tencent QQ: 30302349 -- If you can't reach me by any of these, one of us may be permanently offline -- I use and recommend GNU Privacy Guard to authenticate and secure email messages! Public key: Download from public servers - Key ID EBCCBD6C Fingerprint: Fingerprint: EC0A A53B 3FF3 043B 9C11 7006 55A6
We want an explanation, Mr. Dickney :suss:
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
I don't understand why one would want to ban them? GPL only "hurts" those who want to blindly copy/use the code in an article. I have used this site for a few good years and I can think of only a few times that I have ever taken any code from here and "just used" it in one of my projects. 99% of the time I read the articles to learn new techniques and approaches, and then use these to solve my problem at hand. The few times I did "just use" the code was because it was available completely free, and there was no point of rewriting it. I still had to take the time to understand it, otherwise I wouldn't add it to my project anyway. If it had a licence that prevented me from using it directly, I still wouldn't lose the understanding part. And once you understand something you can do it yourself. So, in conclusion, I can see how a library that is GPL'd would prevent me from "just using" it in my non GPL projects, but what's the big deal? I just won't use it. I can still look at it and see what approach was taken to solving a given problem.
In my experience, the licencer often doesn't understand what GPL means. They heard it stands for "free software", think "it's cool, I want to do this, too", slap "GPL" on their code, and done they are. It hurts the community, because it prevents reuse of otherwise good code that was intended to be reused. We have to educate them one by one, after the fact - I've done that a few times here on CP.* And it hurts the author, because more people will simply ignore his code. *) Worse, I've downloaded samples that simply said "free" in the article, only to find it's GPLed after a lengthy hunt on the authors web site for a more definite answer.
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
I don't understand why one would want to ban them? GPL only "hurts" those who want to blindly copy/use the code in an article. I have used this site for a few good years and I can think of only a few times that I have ever taken any code from here and "just used" it in one of my projects. 99% of the time I read the articles to learn new techniques and approaches, and then use these to solve my problem at hand. The few times I did "just use" the code was because it was available completely free, and there was no point of rewriting it. I still had to take the time to understand it, otherwise I wouldn't add it to my project anyway. If it had a licence that prevented me from using it directly, I still wouldn't lose the understanding part. And once you understand something you can do it yourself. So, in conclusion, I can see how a library that is GPL'd would prevent me from "just using" it in my non GPL projects, but what's the big deal? I just won't use it. I can still look at it and see what approach was taken to solving a given problem.
Thanks for posting exactly my opinion.
____________________________________ Please vote for my article