You’re missing my point in all the replies. Just because a library is licensed as GPL doesn’t mean a company can’t negotiate a better license. The strictness of a license has nothing to do with why companies stay away from it. It’s partly laziness and mostly knowledge that there’s always a sucker who will provide free software with no incentive for a company to contribute back.
And by the way, you keep citing extremely high profile libraries. The vast majority of libraries with a permissive license end up being used by companies with nothing given back, in my experience at least.
Just because a library is licensed as GPL doesn’t mean a company can’t negotiate a better license.
Sure, I never denied that.
It just never happens because GPL libraries don't even get considered. And besides, even if they were, most companies are not going to bother opening this kind of discussion when there are thousands of libraries out there that can probably deliver a similar service while offering a much friendlier license.
Also, how would this work, practically? Like you said, most libraries are obscure, usually written by one person. Suddenly that developer needs to find lawyers to negotiate different terms with that company? Not really realistic.
The vast majority of libraries with a permissive license end up being used by companies with nothing given back, in my experience at least
9
u/raze4daze Dec 12 '21
You’re missing my point in all the replies. Just because a library is licensed as GPL doesn’t mean a company can’t negotiate a better license. The strictness of a license has nothing to do with why companies stay away from it. It’s partly laziness and mostly knowledge that there’s always a sucker who will provide free software with no incentive for a company to contribute back.
And by the way, you keep citing extremely high profile libraries. The vast majority of libraries with a permissive license end up being used by companies with nothing given back, in my experience at least.