license suggestions?

[Chris Gonnerman]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rainer Deyke" <root at rainerdeyke.com>


> "Steve Holden" <sholden at holdenweb.com> wrote in message
> news:Fij27.24993$F%5.1707320 at e420r-atl2.usenetserver.com...
> > And some of us wonder what it is about the GPL that stops your previous,
> > liberally-licensed, version from existing?
>
> Given: software A is released under the BSDL.  Somebody creates an
improved
> version of it (software B) and releases it under the GPL.
>
> A still exists.  But B is better than A, so people will be more likely to
> use B than A.  A still exists, but A is competing with a better version of
> itself.  New programmers will be more likely to improve B than A, because
> they don't want to duplicate effort.  The original author is unable to
> incorporate the improvements to A in future software C unless C is
released
> under the GPL.

Granted.  Whose fault is that?  If the author of A doesn't maintain it, and
other programmers prefer the B program *even with the GPL on it* then B must
be really superior and deserves to win.

Who loses?  A's author can't use B to create C unless he/she commits to
source
code releases forever.  If C is to be commercial software with hidden
source,
and the programmers who created B don't like that, then they chose the right
license.  On the other hand, if A intended to do that anyway, then there is
really no loss to anyone.

Sort of a legal armwrestling match.