On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Outback Dingo <[email protected]> wrote:
> I dont think its about closing any of the code off, I think its more > about how someone can simple add other added > parameters or restrictions on the code base which was originally a > more open unrestricted license But you're fine with commercial software developers making closed source products based off the code base? If yes, then don't you realize you're granting them the right to add restrictions? And if no, then you really should not be using the MIT license but instead, the GPL. Perhaps the issue is that we have two sets of expectations, one for commercial developers (who we excuse when they relicense MIT/BSD/X11 code) and one for free software developers (who we expect to play by our rules). But this division is inaccurate. My strong advice is to use GPLv3 in any case, it's better for the community and creates a level playing field. Your current license favours commercial teams with no benefit to the community (no incentive to contribute back). -Pieter _______________________________________________ Babel-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
