j"1LAnZuoQdcKCkpDBKQMCgziGMoPC4VQUckM<div class="post"><div class="quoteheader"><a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=989.msg12357#msg12357">Quote from: hugolp on September 10, 2010, 06:23:00 AM</a></div><div class="quote"><div class="quoteheader"><a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=989.msg12076#msg12076">Quote from: theymos on September 06, 2010, 03:44:50 AM</a></div><div class="quote">MIT-style licensing is the only way to ensure widespread adoption. Companies won't touch GPLed software.</div><br/>I dont have any problem with MIT license, but there are a lot of companies that are using and developing GPL software. Saying that companies dont like GPL is not true.<br/></div><br/>The GPL is the same as any other commercial license. Any company can license a GPL'd software just the same as they would license any other software: by contacting the developer and arranging for a commercial license.<br/><br/>The GPL just adds the EXTRA benefit that you can also use it for free, as long as your code is ALSO open source.<br/><br/>So any company that has a problem with GPL, must have a problem with ALL commercial licenses as well, and thus they are stuck using ONLY software under the MIT or Apache license. Presumably such a company doesn't run Mac or Windows in-house.<br/></div> text/html
https://whatsonchain.com/tx/7dc037b772c1e1522e9d2c18f7ec890d1e16272b6385aa7b2f84840407f95daa