diff options
authorMelody Horn <melody@boringcactus.com>2021-03-24 15:46:10 -0600
committerMelody Horn <melody@boringcactus.com>2021-03-24 15:46:10 -0600
commitd34dd64bd03fbf6e6f12e5f4056b5a59684c4269 (patch)
parent7620794df0ce8c7d321ea736b775f0665213a8d2 (diff)
brief overview of non-GNU copyleft license usage
1 files changed, 54 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/_posts/2021-03-24-non-fsf-copyleft.md b/_posts/2021-03-24-non-fsf-copyleft.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a629788
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_posts/2021-03-24-non-fsf-copyleft.md
@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
+title: Non-FSF Copyleft Usage
+The Free Software Foundation has decided they'd rather hang out with a sex pest than have an ounce of credibility, so fuck em.
+Let's look at the copyleft licenses they didn't write and see how they're used.
+I'll be using the [Blue Oak Council's list of copyleft licenses](https://blueoakcouncil.org/copyleft) here, because I don't know of a good other way to find specifically copyleft licenses.
+I'll be searching GitHub for `filename:LICENSE "<some snippet from the license>"` and then seeing if anything notable turns up.
+## Maximal Copyleft
+- Cryptographic Autonomy License: almost entirely cryptocurrency bullshit
+- Parity Public License: maintains [its own list of users](https://paritylicense.com/), including some work from substack (original author of browserify, prominent in the node.js scene, name stolen by a shitty newsletter startup) and some Git hook manager with 22.2k stars on GitHub (although it's only Parity licensed while it's in early access, and it'll revert to MIT later on).
+ so there's a notable person and a notable project using this license, which is neat.
+- Reciprocal Public License: well, there's "the most popular service bus for .NET", but that appears to be [basically it](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocal_Public_License).
+## Network Copyleft
+- Affero GPL: fuck GNU, fuck the FSF, fuck RMS, fuck you
+- Apple Public Source License: unsurprisingly, the only use I've seen is for stuff derived directly from Apple releases
+- Common Public Attribution License: apparently it was invented by some startup that hasn't existed since 2012, and I could only find one nontrivial use of it
+- European Union Public License: [well,](https://github.com/search?q=license%3Aeupl-1.2&type=Repositories) there's "`dig` but i rewrote it in rust" [and](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Software_using_the_European_Union_Public_Licence) there's Pi-hole (actually neat!) but that's about it.
+ i think being the pi-hole license (plus having a metagovernment behind it) would probably be enough to ensure its longevity.
+- Non-Profit Open Software License: [GitHub can't find any usage of it!](https://github.com/search?q=filename%3ALICENSE+%22Non-Profit+Open+Software+License%22&type=code)
+- Open Software License: it's got Magento (WordPress for ecommerce) and that's about it
+- RealNetworks Public Source License: ehhhhh I am officially ignoring any license with a mostly-defunct vendor in the title now
+## Strong Copyleft
+- BSD Protection: nothing uses this
+- CC BY-SA: that's not a software license, you can't fool me
+- GPL: fuck that
+- Q Public License: this name has aged poorly and i can't find use of it
+- Sleepycat License: adorable! but not used by anything
+## Weak Copyleft
+- Common Development and Distribution License: apparently this is [popular with enterprisey bullshit because it started at Sun](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Development_and_Distribution_License#Adoption) but it seems like it's mostly enterprisey bullshit
+- Common Public License: this one's IBM's, so there's [even less usage](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Software_using_the_CPL_license)
+- Eclipse Public License: well, there's Eclipse, but also [a lot of other non-enterprise-bullshit (mostly Java) stuff apparently](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eclipse_Public_License#Notable_projects)
+- Erlang Public License: even Erlang doesn't use it anymore lol
+- IBM Public License: ehhhhhhhh
+- LGPL: fuck that
+- Mozilla Public License: [lots of users](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Public_License#Notable_users), probably not going anywhere anytime soon
+- Microsoft Reciprocal License: [not really widely used](https://github.com/search?l=&o=desc&q=license%3Ams-rl&s=stars&type=Repositories), unsurprisingly
+- Sun Public License: [apparently it's the older, worse CDDL](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Public_License)
+## Summary
+for maximal copyleft ("must publish all changes, even those for internal use"), [Parity](https://spdx.org/licenses/Parity-7.0.0.html) is probably the most promising future license.
+for network copyleft ("must offer source to users even across a network"), the [European Union Public License](https://spdx.org/licenses/EUPL-1.2.html) is already seeing some adoption.
+for "strong" copyleft ("must offer source to users even if just linking as a library"), there are no good options because the GPL has been the only game in town for ages.
+for "weak" copyleft ("must offer source to users"), the [Mozilla Public License](https://spdx.org/licenses/MPL-2.0.html) looks like it has a good chance of continuing to exist and be used by actual projeccts for a nice long while.