• Jason2357@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Another way to phrase that is that companies can choose to meaningulfully contribute back, or not, with either project, and there are plenty of examples of each combination.

    • orclev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      No, you have failed to understand how either license works. Companies are forced to contribute back in the case of the GPL and the project can choose to accept that or not. In the case of the BSD license companies can choose whether to contribute back and if they do, then the project has the option to accept it or not. The GPL makes it always the choice of the project, while the BSD makes it always the choice of the company.

      • Jason2357@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        You have failed to understand the difference between idealism and practice. There are more companies that use Linux without ever contributing back than those that do. Those that do do so because it makes practical business sense to improve the upstream project they rely on. Any company that has decided they don’t want to share some code just builds it in a binary module, firmware, or application to sit on top.