| ▲ | big-and-small 3 days ago | |||||||
Copyleft licenses are made to support freedom for everyone and particularly end-users. They only limit freedom of developers / maintainers to exploit the code and users. > Does GPL help the linux kernel get investment from it's corporate users? GPL has helped "linux kernel the project" greatly, but companies invest in it out of their self-interest. They want to benefit from upstream improvements and playing nicely by upstreaming changes is just much cheaper than maintaining own kernel fork. On other side you have companies like Sony that used BSD OS code for their game consoles for decades and contributed shit. So... Two unrelated things. | ||||||||
| ▲ | wwfn 3 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||
I would have thought supporting libcurl and libxml would also be in a company's self-interest. Is that companies do this for GPL'ed linux kernel but not BSD evidence that strong copyleft licensing limits the extent to which OSS projects are exploited/under-resourced? | ||||||||
| ||||||||