> I thinks it may be a trend that is starting to develop. Projects seem > to be changing over to MIT and BSD type licenses.
Wouldn't consider GPL-or-MIT -> MIT change to be significant, users already could use it under the same license. I hope there will be a trend of simplifying licensing when it doesn't limit user's freedom (also of derived works), although I see no indication of it occurring. > Someone please > correct me if I am wrong, but from my understanding of different > licenses, MIT and BSD type licenses do not ensure that a person does > not lock up the software in a proprietary project. True. > If that is the case I am not sure how developers can be ok > with the idea that someone out in the world could be making money off > of your project by just adding a few things on top of it and not have > to give back to the project at all. In at least some projects their developers do this, so they might accept that others also can do it (it's much easier than MySQL-style dual licensing). They also might want companies like Apple to send some patches.
pgpTuwZ4DQWNv.pgp
Description: PGP signature
