[Battlemesh] FCC fw lockdown vs. GPLv3?

[Gio]

On Tuesday, September 29, 2015 04:26:16 AM Linus Lüssing wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 05:28:36PM +0200, Henning Rogge wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Benjamin Henrion <zoobab at gmail.com> 
wrote:
> > > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Henning Rogge <hrogge at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 10:10 PM, Mitar <mitar at tnode.com> wrote:
> > >>> Hi!
> > >>> 
> > >>> Is there other software used by manufacturers beside kernel which
> > >>> could
> > >>> get easier to relicense?
> > >> 
> > >> No...
> > >> 
> > >> the whole GPLv3 disaster already pushed a lot of manufacturers away
> > >> from GPL solutions to software which is BSD licensed... you see the
> > >> effect in Android.
> > > 
> > > Most of the codebase in Android has been rewritten towards BSD-style
> > > software, except the Linux kernel, because probably it is too big to
> > > rewrite.
> > 
> > Exactly...
> > 
> > relicencing to GPLv3 would be a good way to make the industry drop it
> > completely.
> 
> Being more permissive on our side won't make the industry do the same.
> We've seen that with BSD and are now starting to see this again for
> GPLv2 with signed binaries. This "the industry will ignore us if
> we use GPL, Linux won't survive" argument has been there in the 90ies
> already. There it seems to me that the less permissive code was
> actually better off on the long run.
> 
> Big companies simply think economically. They might keep you on the
> hook for the short term so that you throw your code at them but
> will drop you once they acquired enough own developers and own code
> on their side...
> 
> If companies affiliated with Android actually want to lock their
> devices then why would I want to write code for that plattform for
> free? Screw Android - if they don't want us then this relationship
> is doomed anyways.
> 
> With manufacturers (still - they seem to become less) focusing on
> hardware and young startups we actually have a chance to not drown
> completely on the long run if we were using GPLv3. The bigger the
> GPLv3 code basis we can build up now is, the more hardware
> manufacturers we can cooparate with in the future, while reducing
> the risk of being stabbed in the back later.

+1