Some thoughts on licencing.

Most emulator projects use the license because their projects are community driven.

You can tell when a project has a company focus in mind by looking at the license.

If the license is a permissive one, like the or the , they aim to be taken by a company, so they want to give them as few responsibilities as possible.

When a project is a GPL one, what the project wants to do is to protect the members work by forcing companies to return the code.

@lorabe Or #BSD / #MIT is simply about giving the consumer as much freedom as possible.

But what do I know?


@blabber Consumers do not benefit from having the source code closed. They cannot learn, improve or redistribute proprietary software, therefore the only freedom that BSD and MIT provide is the freedom of closing the user's freedom.

Companies do benefit from closing the source code, but users don't.

@lorabe @blabber Copyleft licenses (whatever the preferred one) are the only way to ensure that free software remains free forever. All other non-copyleft licenses have paths toward proprietization.


@downey @blabber yeah, the famous project once had the opportunity to collaborate with SEGA, but under the condition of changing the license from GPL3 to MIT.

They explained that they wouldn't do that because other companies had already abused the work of the community without giving back a thing. So in order to protect people's work, copyleft was a requirement.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

For people who care about, support, or build Free, Libre, and Open Source Software (FLOSS).