GPL copyleft use declining

[woodsmoke]

This is an interesting article about arcane things of which I have no clue and I invite those that are more knowledgeable to comment:

But, I do remember the big threads in forums about GPL a few years ago.

http://www.itworld.com/it-management...ng-faster-ever

woodsmoke

[GreyGeek]

Re: GPL copyleft use declining

Unusual analysis. In looking at the adoption rate data for released projects all GPL type licenses show stead increases from June 07 to Dec of this year. The first derivative for RELEASED PROJECTS shows a slight negative slope, indicating that the rate of increase is declining, which would be normal as numbers change from 80 to 13,733 projects. At no time has the data for RELEASED PROJECTS, or PLANNED PROJECTS for that matter, shown a reversal in the growth trend, i.e., this year's numbers are less than last years.

However, concerning PLANNED PROJECTS both Aslett and Byfield want to make a lot of hay about what has happened since June of this year. Unlike RELEASED PROJECTS, which always increase from period to period, PLANNED PROJECTS frequently fail to increase, although they don't decrease. Such headlines are bound to generate page hits which, all to often these days, is their only purpose. BlackDuck gets a lot of press for itself with this article.

Planned projects are just promises. Released projects are folks putting their time and money where their mouth is. Released GPL projects are, and always have been, in a steady increase.


I would like to see a breakdown in regards to the types of projects: those for smartphones & tablets, and the traditional GPL projects for netbooks, notebooks, laptops and desktops.

[woodsmoke]

Re: GPL copyleft use declining

Hi GG good comments and as always you have a high end thing going on...the first derivative! lol

anybody else have comments?

woodsmoke

[Telengard]

Re: GPL copyleft use declining

Moneyline:

Now, Aslett does not come out and say this, so this is all me: one thing that occurs to me is the formal release date of the GPLv3 in June 2007. Was the creation of the GPLv3 and the sometimes contentious discussion that led up to it a driver for vendors to shift towards permissive licenses?

Unusual analysis.

Don't you mean biased? The article is promoting the premise that GPL3 is an unpopular license. The author probably was just waiting for some data to come along and validate his ideas, or even just appear to.

[perspectoff]

Re: GPL copyleft use declining

GPLv3 (and Affero GPLv3) are very good licenses, but they are not for everyone. The LGPL is a good alternative. Further, the GPL types of licenses were thought to be limited in application to copyrighted works and non-product types of intellectual property (which the FDL had been left to cover).

What happened is that about 10 years ago lawyers got into the act and started creating (and promoting) the Creative Commons licensing scheme, which has lots of iterations. There are generally 11 variations (of which 6 are regularly used).

It was felt that the Creative Commons licenses could be applied to software as well as media types of works (and the copyrighting of software instead of patenting / licensing it is a specialized cross-over field that keeps many lawyers employed).

As usual with anything legal, the increased complexity and variety often misleads just enough to be able to create lawsuits (which is, of course, why licenses are created in the first place). Nevertheless, the variety of CC licenses fits a broader range of needs, ostensibly, than the two main varieties of the GPL license.

The CC licenses have therefore risen in popularity (taking away from usage of the GPL).

At the end of the day is all falderal anyway, because lawsuits are won by those with the deepest pockets and ability to wage legal wars. There is no truth, justice, or sense of right or wrong in most legal systems; only stamina and money determines the outcome.

Every judge rules based on some innate bias -- the job of lawyers is to feed some sort of esoteric (and usually arbitrary) rationale (which may or may not be some sort of licensing argument) that the judge can use to support his/her innate bias.