Post #1354107

2026-03-21 18:17 UTC

@mitsuhiko Nope. In the Linux example, there's a specific need to ensure that, no matter who is at the helm, there are basic rights that Linux-compatible software can rely upon. Example: Let's say Entity A wants to make proprietary video-editing software. Let's say Entity B wants to make a CG company. Entity B wants Entity A's software, but they're worried about what happens after Entity A disappears. Entity A isn't budging about being full copyright, closed-source forever. (1/3)

Replies (1)

@scottmichaud@mastodon.gamedev.place 2026-03-21 18:20

@mitsuhiko Convince them to switch to a license that drops to MIT/etc. on abandonment? Okay you could do that. GPL would be dumb for Entity A. Alternatively, Entity A could write their closed-source software for Linux. There, Entity A could go away, but Entity B could rely upon _the platform_ always providing GPL guarantees. GPL makes sense for _Linux_ Entity A can be long gone, but Entity B can still beat Linux into a configuration such that Entity A's software works as it did "forever" (2/3)

Open ##1354108