Unless I misunderstood something fundamental, the CLA means a BSD-like license for Canonical but GPL for everybody else.
Outside of Canonical: why would someone who prefers BSD licenses accept it being publicly released only as GPL; or why would someone who cares about GPL accept the CLA if it allows Canonical to build a closed proprietary distribution out of it?
Power management, mobile and firmware developer on Linux. Security developer at nvidia. Ex-biologist. Content here should not be interpreted as the opinion of my employer. Also on Mastodon and Bluesky.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The skewed playing field
Date: 2013-06-20 11:21 am (UTC)Outside of Canonical: why would someone who prefers BSD licenses accept it being publicly released only as GPL; or why would someone who cares about GPL accept the CLA if it allows Canonical to build a closed proprietary distribution out of it?