#gpl

See tagged statuses in the local BookWyrm community

We now understand why permissive is bad for .

taught us why is important and , , etc allow corporations to enclose and steal our contributions.

's use of for targeting in , which may also use the code we donated to the commons, shows that we need to be more restrictive if we want to avoid assisting war crimes and probable .

I hope some lawyers are on this, and will help us add exclusions to protect from such use.

3 serious forks of to watch:

Mutli-threaded fork of Redis based on Redis 6.
BSD 3 Clause license.
Owned by Snapchat.
https://github.com/Snapchat/KeyDB

Recent fork by one person based on the last open source version of Redis 7.2.4.
On Codeberg.
LGPL 3.0 license.
https://codeberg.org/redict/redict

PlaceholderKV (searching for name)

Started by former Redis contributor(s) and AWS employees.
BSD 3 Clause license.
https://github.com/placeholderkv/placeholderkv

Boosts appreciated 🙏

Redis logo

(neo)’liberal’ licenses like MIT and BSD that enable corporations to partake of the free labour of others

implying that the / doesn't let corps partake in the free labor of others too

and enclose the commons

Your "open commons" is worthless if it's effectively still proprietary. Case in point: 's extensions that pretty much everybody else have to support (Mastodon is AGPL, and it's not realistic to implement ActivityPub strictly to the spec and expect it to be compatible with Mastodon). Or GNUisms (implemented by software which are GPL) that userlands are forced to support. Or where there's basically only one server implementation that is usable ( whichis AGPL). I could go on and on.

RE: https://mastodon.ar.al/users/aral/statuses/112070988474220155

If you see the AGPL licenses on my free and open source work and you think “damn you, I can’t use this to enrich myself or my corporation without sharing back what I’ve built on top of what you’ve freely shared and thus contribute to cultivating a healthy commons where others might enjoy the same benefits from my work that I want to obtain from yours” (a) you really have long-winded thoughts and (b) well, you already see the flaw in your reasoning.

And this is why I refuse to give Auttomatic any of my money. I have places where I can get the woocommerce extensions without forking over money to a company that consistently releases their most important ecommerce software with fatal errrors

I've really gotten the sense over the last several years that they've enshittified themselves and found their "support" extremely lacking.

https://wordpress.org/support/topic/after-the-8-5-0-update-i-encountered-an-error/page/3/#post-17336601

Fun stuff: x11-misc/albert used to be licensed . Then the maintainer decided to arbitrarily make it proprietary with a custom license ("freeware, i.e. proprietary and source available", with a limited right to redistribute binaries for specific Linux distributions). Except that the project has received some pretty large contributions before that, and the authors of these contributions hold the copyright to them. Since the contributions were made under the GPL, they cannot be incorporated into a proprietary project.

On top of everything, the maintainer has *deleted* the issue discussing the license issues, in particular the GPL violation.

https://github.com/albertlauncher/albert/blob/f9a33001e9e2930291e8d1a8669a6c43d1de2269/LICENSE.md
https://web.archive.org/web/20210225183856/https://github.com/albertlauncher/albert/issues/765
https://bugs.gentoo.org/766129