[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/g/ - Technology


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



At what point will companies get sick of our GPL-style licensing and just implement the libraries/tools on their own, under a proprietary or BSD-style license, so that they don't have to deal with the licenses, GPL violations. Would this really be such a daunting task for them or could they do it by throwing a bunch of money at it?
>>
>>70173529
>implying there isn't already a non-GPL implementation for literally everything
It goes the other way around, freetard.
>>
>>70173543
Sorry that the market share of your OS is infinitesimal. Enjoy your retarded blowfish.
>>
>>70173566
>my OS' infinitesimal market share is greater than your OS' infinitesimal market share
Cute.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.