• TheImpressiveX@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        103
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        It means it can’t ever become proprietary closed-source software (not without a major lawsuit).

      • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        50
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s pretty much not reversible and the code is free to use, modify, and distribute forever. And if you do modify it you also must make those changes open source.

        Very good news

      • Mwa@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        gpl v3 you can do pretty much anything but you have to put it the same license but it has like drm protections and Anti-Tivoization and also has some patent protections people find this license too strict

        • delirious_owl@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Its actually more restrictive, in a good way.

          You can’t, for example, fork it, make changes, and sell that derivative software without releasing the source code

          • Mwa@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            yeah but drm is too strict for some people and anti tivozation this is why linux did not do gpl 3.0 or later

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Why the but? GPL 3 is the correct license to use for open source projects to ensure they stay open and corps don’t freeload on them.

      • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        3 months ago

        English isn’t my first language. I share your opinion regarding the license. Which connector would you use instead of “but” to indicate that you succeeded in your efforts even though it was harder you thought it would be?

        • 0ops@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          3 months ago

          English is my only language, and yours looks fine to me. I thought it was pretty clear from the first comment that the “but” indicated success despite difficulties, and as you clarified that’s exactly what you meant.

        • delirious_owl@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          “and”

          If you study non violent communication, folks will say to avoid using “I agree with you, but”. Because as soon as you say " but ", people get defensive and stop listening to you.

          Whenever possible, replace “but” with “and” if the sentence still has the same meaning