Skip to Content
Last modified by chrisby on 2025/01/11 10:03
From version 2.58
edited by chrisby
on 2024/09/19 13:08
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 2.60
edited by chrisby
on 2025/01/01 11:47
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -42,12 +42,12 @@
42 42  The FSF sees several problems with permissive licenses:
43 43  
44 44  * Permissive code allows vendors to include it in their proprietary products. Software that is partially open source does not necessarily make it more secure. For example, in a product that is 99% open source, the remaining 1% proprietary part may contain all the malicious code. This means that the partially open source product poses the same dangers as a 100% proprietary product. 100% open source code running on your own machine is a necessary condition to achieve freedom and security.
45 -* Another problem is that vendors can reuse permissive code without any obligation to share improvements. The vendor writes new proprietary or closed source code based on the open source code and keeps those improvements for himself. This means that the work of the open source community can be used for the vendor's financial benefit without anything being given back. Even worse, the proprietary product may outcompete the original open source project, reducing its impact and violating the open source freedoms of its users.
45 +* Another problem is that vendors can reuse permissive code without any obligation to share improvements. The vendor writes new proprietary or closed source code based on the open source code and keeps those improvements for himself. This means that the work of the open source community can be used for the vendor's financial benefit without anything being given back. Worse, the proprietary product may outcompete the original open source project, reducing its impact and harming the open source ecosystem. This is called "proprietary capture" or "open core hijacking".
46 46  * There is also the problem of fragmentation. Multiple vendors may each create their own proprietary product based on the same permissive code. Instead of collaborating and contributing back to the common core project, they are inefficiently duplicating their efforts.
47 47  
48 48  **Copyleft Licenses**
49 49  
50 -To address the problems with proprietary software, the FSF primarily promotes copyleft licenses, which require that any derivative works of the software be licensed under the same terms as the original code. A derivative work is a new work based on the original copyleft code that incorporates it at the source level. This ensures that when contributions are made to a copyleft project, or when copyleft code is reused in another project, the resulting work must also be released under the same copyleft license. This prevents vendors from incorporating copyleft code into proprietary products, and ensures that any derivative works remain open source. In addition, copyleft licenses require that the source code be made available to users so that they can modify, build, and control the software themselves.
50 +To address the problems with proprietary software, the FSF primarily promotes copyleft licenses, which require that any derivative works of the software be licensed under the same terms as the original code. The term "derivative work" is legally vague, but a commoA derivative work is a new work based on the original copyleft code that incorporates it at the source level. This ensures that when contributions are made to a copyleft project, or when copyleft code is reused in another project, the resulting work must also be released under the same copyleft license. This prevents vendors from incorporating copyleft code into proprietary products, and ensures that any derivative works remain open source. In addition, copyleft licenses require that the source code be made available to users so that they can modify, build, and control the software themselves.
51 51  
52 52  **OSI Position**
53 53