[lwip-users] Re: ¿GPL or BSD?

[Kieran Mansley]

On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Sergio PérezAlcañiz wrote:
> The BSD license do not protect the freedom of the author in the sense that any
> company can just take the code and sell it (using that code with its own
> product, or even compiling the BSD code and selling with no new functionality
> added). And the BSD do not force that company to give any good in return,
> that is, the company that is selling the programs do not have to return to
> the community (the original author) neither new code nor money.
>
> The GPL prevents a malicious company of making money selling the
> "effort"
> (code, design, etc.) of other people. Getting for free (gratis) the code
> (work) of other people and selling it for a fee, which is in my
> understanding, pretty close to the idea of robbery (sell something that is
> not yours). At least, as a developer, I think that that behaviour is immoral
> although legal (because the BSD permits to do it).

I'm well aware of the differences between the GPL and BSD licences, and
it's probably not appropriate to start a licence war on this list.  The
original author of lwIP (Adam) and other contributors have in the past
expressed a strong preference for the BSD licence.  There are some who
like you would like to see it GPL too.

My reason for prefering the BSD licence is that it allows the code I have
contributed to reach a wider audience and be used by more people.  I don't
care if someone else is charging for it, or making a profit out of it.
I'm more concerned that any improvements that are distributed can be used
by all those involved with lwIP.  Many have come out and said that if it
were GPL they would no longer be involved with lwIP.

> On the other hand, GPL code can be used by companies with not problem at
> all. If the GPL code states clearly the boundaries of the GPL code
> (please, see the http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html), a company
> can use (link) the GPL code and sell ITS PRODUCT in a closed way. All
> the development done by that company in its home made code is absolutely
> under the control of the company, but if the company improves the GPL
> code then the code belongs to the community which created it.

That FAQ makes the point very clearly that if a program links against a
library that is GPL, then the program itself must also be GPL.  This is
why GPL would be a big problem for many users of lwIP.  LGPL may be a
partial solution to this, but even that had opposition when it was last
raised.

> Using the GPL will increase the development of the lwIP, because the
> companies that use it will return to the community its improvements.
> Otherwise, companies act like a black box that takes code and returns
> nothing.

I'm sure there are some companies out there making use of lwIP without
contributing anything back.  Big deal.  Even if they just pop up every now
and then to make bug reports, then that is a great help.  There are also a
number of people using lwIP for commercial purposes who are making very
active contributions to lwIP.  Without them, I doubt it would have been
developed at all in the last 6 months.  The existence of lwIP as it stands
disproves your assertion that companies will not return improvements to
the community.

So, to get back to the point, feel free to licence your changes under the
GPL, but re-releasing lwIP with the GPL will be pointless.  It will still
be available from savannah with a BSD licence.  The clearest way to do
this is for you to provide a patch for your work which is licensed
seperately to lwIP.

Kieran