Maximal: A New Open-Source License

[Jodell88]

This program, plugin, or function is licenced under the Maximal Opensource Licence. That means that it`s source should always stay open source. And any changes must be available with the branches. And its derivatives can never in anyway be released as closed source.

Authorship can be included, but it is not neccesary. A list of changes by author is though recommended.

Short, sweet, and to the point. :thumbsup:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTA5NTQ

 

[lxskllr]

I wonder what was wrong with the GPL?

Edit:
Actually, it seems closer to BSD, but with a non-proprietary release clause. I find it hard to believe there wasn't already a suitable license that could be used. I don't have a problem with his terms, but I don't think more licenses is the way to go.

 

[Jodell88]

I wonder what was wrong with the GPL?

Edit:
Actually, it seems closer to BSD, but with a non-proprietary release clause. I find it hard to believe there wasn't already a suitable license that could be used. I don't have a problem with his terms, but I don't think more licenses is the way to go.

There's too much IMO. D:
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical

 

[zokudu]

I wonder what was wrong with the GPL?

Edit:
Actually, it seems closer to BSD, but with a non-proprietary release clause. I find it hard to believe there wasn't already a suitable license that could be used. I don't have a problem with his terms, but I don't think more licenses is the way to go.

I've actually heard theres a huge push away from the GPL in favor of something like the BSD license mainly because corporations don't touch GPL with a 10 ft pole but BSD allows it to be open source and corporations are comfortable contributing and using BSD based code allowing for better widespread usage.

 

[lxskllr]

I've actually heard theres a huge push away from the GPL in favor of something like the BSD license mainly because corporations don't touch GPL with a 10 ft pole but BSD allows it to be open source and corporations are comfortable contributing and using BSD based code allowing for better widespread usage.

I think the "huge push" is exaggerated. With any push though, it means users should be pushing back. The GPL enforces freedom for users, and I fully endorse that. Corporations want the benefit of free code, but don't want to extend that benefit to others. That's despicable behavior, and counter to free computing which in these times is equivalent to free speech, free association, and freedom from unreasonable search/seizure.