Am 24.01.2017 um 16:24 schrieb Audun Skaugen:
ma., 23.01.2017 kl. 20.55 +0100, skrev Ben Franksen:
Do you have any evidence to support this statement? I ask because if what you say is true, most companies willfully and severely restrict their options. For instance, a company that employs lawyers who "won't touch GPL3 or even LGPL3 with a ten foot pole" could not use Linux in any way (the kernel is GPL licensed), nor e.g. Android (based on Linux kernel).
I have no data on how many companies in the world use Linux. What I do know is that many companies, even big corporations, actually support the Linux kernel with code (e.g. drivers), thus triggering the most restricting clauses in the GPL. For instance, Volkswagen AG has contributed socketcan to the kernel.
Actually, the Linux kernel is GPLv2 licenced[1]. I believe companies are more comfortable with version 2 than version 3.
Same with cpphs: GPLv2 for the program, for the library it's LGPLv2, and there is also LICENCE-commercial which allows unrestricted distribution of the binary (w/o sources). Cheers Ben -- "Make it so they have to reboot after every typo." ― Scott Adams