BSD v. GPL, Jason Dixon, NYCBSDCon 2008

BSD vs GPL is a sweeping epic, focused on the dichotomy between good and evil. It peers inside the hearts and minds of the creators of these movements and dissects their battle for world domination. No common documentary will dare to follow the path that BSD vs GPL blazes. This presentation was given by Jason Dixon at the NYC BSD Conference at Columbia University on October 11, 2008

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• jasondixson
• bsd
• gpl
• nycbsdcon
• nycbsdcon2008

[barterpc]

I think honestly it's like comparing the Magna Carta to the Constitution. The BSD license being the Magna Carta of course. BSD was a step in the right direction. It had it's time and it preserved certain rights for developers. However, as soon as it was realized that corporations like Microsoft could abuse the BSD license the GNU revolution was started. It's an inevitable thing. Once one system of doing something begins to fail people thing of a new and improved way.... and it will happen again.

[Rubdos]

Any option I can click Like twenty times? With YT registering it, offcourse

[Rubdos]

LOOOOL, the presentor is a BSD freak :D I'm a GPL guy, but it was fantastic!!

[phopojijo]

So it's okay for organizations to build products on the back of BSD code and completely limit freedom completely except explicit licensees, but not products that limits freedom except the freedoms carried through to end users?

There's room for every license if properly used. Yes GPL is overused, but it makes complete sense for a product with a lot of dependent art to ensure ongoing and free (community & consortium) support for said art. IE: Linux. If trust was everything, why copyright at all?

[himalde]

We need both. GPL keeps the code free, BSD give the users all freedoms. Let the author decide what freedom is most important to him.

[bobdole57]

If i rewrote emacs so it was actually usable for example, never publicly released it. Hypothetically Richard Stallman could sue me. If i sent a binary only copy to my friend without my source code (by accident mind you) Richard Stallman **would** sue me.

That my friends, is your GPL/Copyleft license.

[bobdole57]

@anticomuna

Thats total BSD. Anyone can take GPL'ed software right? Red hat and Oracle and sell GPL software right? But you're really against Microsoft Windows using the BSD TCP/IP stack?

Thats what your hangup is?

All you anti-BSD license people are stuck in this false religious war thing. its stupid when you get right down too it. Red Hat's whole business is making money off of linux. Selling Linux (legally) GPL'ed LINUX.

And you complain about "stealing" BSD code? Bah.

[bobdole57]

@anticomuna

They aren't profiting off your work. If you put out BSD code, sure someone can sell it. People sell Linux too and its GPL. The difference is the BSD license lets them change your code and sell it. They have to improve it if they want to be able to sell it really. Because your BSD code is still freely available. Who is going to buy something thats free? Ask those RedHat guys...

[anticomuna]

BSD is about giving the freedom to multinational corporations to take your stuff without paying, the GPL is about protecting the freedom of the individual developer and small company against abuse from multinational corporations. This video is so dumb, it is beyond belief.

[anticomuna]

@bobdole57 "Basically, what I am saying is, if I release something under a BSD license the fact that it might make its way into commercial projects if its really good is a GOOD thing. " Good for whom? You won't see a cent of it. I would rather delete all my projects than let some company profit off my work without paying me.