On Wed, 3 Mar 2004, Ernest Prabhakar wrote: >> How does a copyleft provision either help or hurt these objectives? > > The way I like to think of it (personal opinion only!) is that: > - copyleft ensures the *code* always stays free (maximizing the > original author and end-users freedom) > - BSD/AFL license ensure the *developer* using the code has as much > freedom as possible
This is the best short answer I have seen! I think it can be further improved/polished using the following observations. Copyleft (a.k.a. viral) licenses leave original author at most as much freedom as BSD-like licenses. Copyleft licenses restrict end-users freedom no less than BSD-like licenses. "Developer using" is a "user". Thus, the short answer becomes: - Copyleft licenses maximize the freedom of the code - BSD-like licenses maximize the freedom of the user Everything else seems to be side-effects of the above fundamental difference. It is difficult to say a priori whether an educational project benefits more from the former or the latter. Your ultimate goal is to maximize the number of users while giving them a decent product. Either license can achieve that, in some cases. If you think you need commercial involvement, _and_ you do not mind "occasional jerks", as Ernest put it, (even if they become very rich and start to rule the world) than BSD-like licenses would be preferable, IMHO. Alex. -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3