I understand your position. IANAL but I want to go a bit deeper on some points. On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 7:56 PM, Anthony Minessale <anthony.minessale@gmail.com> wrote:
The GPL is the license that would require change not the MPL. (there already is such a change called LGPL btw)
As Nyamul pointed, MPL "has some complex restrictions that make it incompatible with the GNU GPL". It means that, according to FSF, you can't link a module under current MPL 1.1 and another under GPL 2 or 3. This part may be solved in MPL 2.0.
The GPL says if you link to anything GPL, your whole program and anything that links to it is GPL. Once that happens all your rights to use the software for business are gone unless you are the sole owner of the code.
Not exactly. The whole program can't be relicensed without agreement of the copyright holders. Until this, you cannot link with GPL-code. Or more precisely, you cannot redistribute your code when linked against GPL-code. This means that you can link FreeSWITCH with a GPL-ed lib *at home* without license problem.
Therefore it's not possible for FreeSWITCH to be compatible with the GPL. If you look at the obvious use case: someone takes libGPLgoodies and wraps it in a 10 line exe and sells it for $20, its construed as unfair. Probably true...... so the GPL narrow-mindedly focuses on this paradigm.
But someone can still sell GPL code for $20. GPL doesn't forbid selling.
Now turn the tables and imagine MongoAPP that does all kinds of different functions that has mod_GPL_Hello_World.so that just prints hello world on the console. That too would cause all of MongoAPP to become GPL which is enough to make you spit out your drink in disbelief.
By using MPL/GPL/LGPL triple license as Mozilla does, you will allow somebody (or yourself) to propose a bundle with FreeSWITCH and some GPL libs. Currently this is not possible. Mozilla FAQ (http://www-archive.mozilla.org/MPL/relicensing-faq.html#why-lgpl) explains this precisely. Currently solutions can be build with FreeSWITCH under either MPL or proprietary license. With trilicensing, you add two more possibilities which give access to the tons of GPL softwares. For example, If I want to create a FS module that uses openchange to access toM$ Exchange servers to read calendar, I can't because openchange is licensed, as samba4, under GPL3 (Website: http://www.openchange.org/). Same if I want to create a TTS mod_espeak (GPL2+).
The only way around it is to avoid GPL software which is our common practice and has worked well for us thus far. We just choose not to get involved with it due to difference of opinion.
OK. Regards Mathieu Parent