this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2023
631 points (91.8% liked)

Programmer Humor

32726 readers
158 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml
cat_programmer@lemmy.ml
631
All other licenses are cuck licenses (lemmy.basedcount.com)
submitted 1 year ago by HurgletOfficial@lemmy.basedcount.com to c/programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
68 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] aberrate_junior_beatnik@midwest.social 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Then I need to include a snippet of GPL’ed code for any reason

A snippet? Surely you don't need to include a snippet of someone else's labor.

all that work now no longer belongs to me

It does belong to you. You still own the copyright of the work. You can still license it however you want, you just also need to make it available under the GPL.

[–] MJBrune@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A snippet? Surely you don’t need to include a snippet of someone else’s labor.

I mean, it's an example sometimes people want to just include a library to say, parse a file format. A small snippet of code that could be GPLed, all just to support a random file format that the users want.

It does belong to you. You still own the copyright of the work. You can still license it however you want, you just also need to make it available under the GPL.

Eh, I guess I can dual-license it but it still removes my exclusivity of ownership which is important in our capitalistic society in order to gain money which you use to live. Essentially GPL removes a large way to gain money. If you offer something for free but you have to compile it, or you offer it pre-compiled but paid for. Someone is typically just going to just compile the free code and offer binaries on their own site.

[–] aberrate_junior_beatnik@midwest.social 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

removes my exclusivity of ownership

Again, using GPL'd code does not remove your ownership of the code you wrote. Using other people's code in general does remove your exclusivity of ownership, regardless of license, since the code other people wrote belongs to them.

Essentially GPL removes a large way to gain money.

  1. What you are saying is you should be entitled to make money off of someone else's work. If you want to make money on something, you may be required to do the work yourself.
  2. Individuals writing software and selling licenses for is not, in the grand scheme of things, a "large way" to get money. The vast majority of money made from writing software is programmers being paid to write software for someone else who will own the license. Software written under "permissive" licenses is by and large used to create wealth for the owning class, not individual programmers.
[–] MJBrune@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Using other people’s code in general does remove your exclusivity of ownership, regardless of license, since the code other people wrote belongs to them.

it removes my exclusivity of ownership over my own code. Not talking about the small snippet that I don't have exclusive ownership over. Pretty basic distinction here.

What you are saying is you should be entitled to make money off of someone else’s work. If you want to make money on something, you may be required to do the work yourself.

I'd gladly pay them a smaller fee but that's the reason I don't GPL my code. I don't feel like the fee the GPL charges by default (the requirement to license all the code it touches into GPL) is fair. You clearly disagree and that's fine. I won't use your code.

Individuals writing software and selling licenses for is not, in the grand scheme of things, a “large way” to get money. The vast majority of money made from writing software is programmers being paid to write software for someone else who will own the license.

I'm an indie game developer so I disagree. How I get my money is selling copies of my software is largely how I make money. If you want to argue that in the business corporate software complex everyone is just writing code for money and no one is selling it as a copy, that's fine, I don't care about that work. I just know why I don't like GPLing my code. It's too restrictive for me and thus I feel it's unfair to ask of other people to follow.

[–] aberrate_junior_beatnik@midwest.social 9 points 1 year ago

it removes my exclusivity of ownership over my own code.

Your statement is false. It does not remove or diminish your exclusivity of ownership over your own code. That's just not how copyright works. I don't know how else to put it.

I’d gladly pay them a smaller fee

If I ever wrote code you wanted to use in a game you wanted to sell, and you reached out to me, I'd just let you use the code under a different license for free. My main concern is that corporations would freeload off my work. Some people wouldn't even do it for any fee. I think that's silly, but they get to set the terms of how we use their code.

selling copies of my software is largely how I make money

That's great! You are part of a tiny group of people who manage to make money this way, and that's no small accomplishment. More power to you, and I wish you more success. If you feel comfortable revealing it here, what game(s) do you sell?

[–] lily33@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Not exactly. For example, you can't make the whole thing, GPL snippet included, available under MIT. You can only license your own contribution however you want (in addition to GPL).

[–] aberrate_junior_beatnik@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago

Yes, you don't own the thing you didn't make.