this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2024
84 points (98.8% liked)

Linux

48330 readers
643 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/18408267

On Open Source and the Sustainability of the Commons par Ploum - Lionel Dricot.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

What I am suggesting is using a license that disallows capitalist firms completely from using the software not AGPL, which still allows them to use the software as long as they provide source code. In other words, copyfarleft that only extends use rights to non-capitalist commons-based economic entities-like worker coops. The project can then dual license to capitalist firms charging them for the right to use the software. This would give them a source of funding to fund any legal fights @linux

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I get that, but it won't help. That was one of the motivations behind the AGPL, and it hasn't really worked for all the reasons I gave. Work for enough companies and you see it over and over again.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

@drwho The difference in my mind is that AGPL doesn't come with a builtin business model to fund the legal fights when they become necessary. Such a copyfarleft license does by charging capitalist firms a licensing fee for using the software. These funds can then be used for paying project developers and funding license enforcement for those that choose to use the software without paying the licensing fee @linux

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I ask from a position of ignorance, because I simply don't know: Has anyone actually done this? Has it worked?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

Not yet.

Copyfarleft has not had a whole movement built up around it, and no one has standardized the licenses.

@linux

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

AGPL, hasn't worked

What are your thoughts on SSPL? I'm on the fence and leaning towards SSPL, or at least needing a more restrictive AGPL. I believe the FSF is too ideological and the OSI has a conflict of interest and that's why the two reject it. Though I believe SSPL may be poorly thought out.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

I don't know. I don't have an opinion on it.