Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2020 17:26:27 -0600 From: Bob Proulx <bob@proulx.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: diff is a little diff -- erent Message-ID: <20200829171622180444664@bob.proulx.com> In-Reply-To: <CAOgwaMtWcNkXe1n%2BDG9Xmv8uWnHEs0VrTM2OpgwMBGULLxs--A@mail.gmail.com> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.2008260122071.73252@bucksport.safeport.com> <20200826094948.333c67b0.freebsd@edvax.de> <alpine.BSF.2.00.2008261131320.73252@bucksport.safeport.com> <CAOgwaMv4ofq6oPbmN9RznPquPn-v3sKzbxkgLaRht1RxdcEbpw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.2008261223340.73252@bucksport.safeport.com> <CAOgwaMtWcNkXe1n%2BDG9Xmv8uWnHEs0VrTM2OpgwMBGULLxs--A@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote: > The trouble is the following : > > A company is making investment to develop a software . > Assume It is based on FreeBSD . If that company uses FreeBSD , by the > effect of GPL parts , the company should also > supply sources of its own proprietary software . Except that is not a requirement of the GPL. > This will destroy the competitive advantage of the company and waste > the investment on the software which is not an acceptable situation > . Trouble caused by GPL is about such cases . Except that is not a requirement of the GPL. This has been discussed many times so I don't think I will detail the arguments again. But I feel compelled to say something here or people will read it and believe that it is true. You may ship your closed source proprietary program on a GPL licensed Linux kernel and mostly GPL licensed userland of commands without providing source for your propriety licensed program. No problem. Bob
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20200829171622180444664>