Content pfp
Content
@
https://warpcast.com/~/channel/fc-updates
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Varun Srinivasan pfp
Varun Srinivasan
@v
Proposing a copyleft license for Snapchain We need to release Snapchain under an open source license for people to be able to use the code safely. We're proposing using GPL v3, which is a copy left license. This means that you can use, modify and redistribute it freely as long as any changes are also made public and available to all.
15 replies
9 recasts
87 reactions
Daniel Fernandes pfp
Daniel Fernandes
@dfern.eth
I cosign @shazow.eth's retort to @vitalik.eth's (well intentioned) blog, and would vouch for MIT : https://farcaster.xyz/shazow.eth/0x6d80e52e
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Varun Srinivasan pfp
Varun Srinivasan
@v
đź‘€
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
shazow pfp
shazow
@shazow.eth
Optimize for making it easier for snapchain to succeed, pick a permissive license. 🙏
1 reply
0 recast
5 reactions
Andrei O. pfp
Andrei O.
@andrei0x309
I do think that your premise is correct, that permissive licenses produce more open-source and create a larger pool of authors. But also allows more companies to shape the future of a project, the idea of copyleft is to limit the control of capital, copyleft by design is ment to reduce capital power in software, and that many times might be the desired outcome, especially if the project is of large importance, for smaller projects a copyleft or permisive license does not matter so much. Also, to be honest, while copyleft licenses will affect capital interests, the Linux ecosystem is full of copyleft, and we can hardly say that the Linux ecosystem is a failure; in fact, it’s the backbone of what powers most of the online world.
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
shazow pfp
shazow
@shazow.eth
Copyleft fails to do any of that in 2025. I address the Linux scenario at the end, the 90s was a very different landscape.
2 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
Andrei O. pfp
Andrei O.
@andrei0x309
And again I acknowledge that the 2025 landscape is very different from the one in the 90s, but it is very hard not to determine that copyleft licenses limit for-profit companies from being involved, all evidence point to that. Even in your article, you argue that it will limit contributions by people who want to use the product commercially, if it had 0 effect on for-profit entities, then there would have been no meaningful difference between a copyleft and permissive license. As you said in the first reply to this post, it’s an optimization issue. I already stated that I also think that, at least in the initial stages, copyleft will for sure have drawbacks, such as a lower number of contributions and interest, but at the same time, many for-profit entities will stay away. I don’t pretend to know what is better for this project, but it’s my opinion that there are scenarios where success can exist with a copyleft license too.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Andrei O. pfp
Andrei O.
@andrei0x309
In your post, you state that copyleft licenses fail to accomplish their intended goal of limiting for-profit actors. The premise for that is that those entities will violate the license anyway. But, if we consider that as true, then licenses have 0 value. The license is meant to be enforceable. If it’s not, then why have any license at all? It does not make any difference. If we start from the point that entities will ignore the license, then the whole discussion is flawed, and the license is just a piece of text with no value. Similar with what’s happend with many constitutions when they are not enforced thier just a piece of long text.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction