

Is GPL still relevant? - rule30
http://giovanni.bajo.it/post/56510184181/is-gpl-still-relevant

======
motters
This article completely misunderstands what GPL is about.

~~~
giovannibajo1
You never stop learning. Why don't you explain me what the GPL is about?

~~~
spacelizard
The purpose of the GPL is to bring freedom to the users and to discourage the
use of proprietary software. The whole article postulates that proprietary
software is acceptable, which is why it has no context. The GPL was _never_
relevant to proprietary software developers because their goal is to restrict
their users.

~~~
giovannibajo1
I understand that, but I think this reading of my article is too simplified.

A large part of my article has one goal: discussing the fact that the GPL has,
on one hand, spurred the FLOSS ecosystem in software components, whilst on the
other failed its goal of terminating the existence/relevance of proprietary
software. Given the decreasing importance of desktop systems in the consumer
world, I also maintain that this failure is now final, that is not subject to
change before the end of mainstream relevance of desktop apps (a.k.a "there
will never be a Linux desktop year").

You may disagree with this of course, but I wouldn't say that my article
implies that I do not understand the GPL, as motters said.

