License to Copy

Up until very recently, I found the licenses under which programs are distributed to be very boring. Similarly, when I installed software on my computer I clicked the ‘I agree’ button without reading through them carefully, as I know I’m not planning on doing anything that anyone would mind me doing with it. Consequently, I think it is quite weird that the thing that has caught my interest above everything else in the discussion about free software is the various licenses.

From what I understand by what I’ve read about the various licenses is that the default one is the copyright. Basically, when you write code and state that it is copyrighted, no one but you may copy the code or make money from it.

Free software can either be copyleft or copycenter, both wordplays on copyright. Both kinds of licenses grant the right to modify and redistribute software. The difference between these is that modified copyleft software must continue to be copyleft, meaning that no following modifications may become proprietary. Copycenter software does not have that restriction. A famous example of a copyleft license is the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL), whereas Berkely Software Distribution (BSD) licenses are permissive (modifications may become proprietary should the modifier want to) and copycenter.

I can very well understand the need for copyright, as it’s an incentive to write code that you can earn money from. If no one may copy your code it might be easier for the people who want to use your program to buy it from you than to make their own version. If the program is copyleft, it might not be freeware, but it will be much easier to make your own version of it.

The copyleft alternative is an even better alternative, in many cases, as it gives people the right to help make software better. What I can’t understand is why a programmer should wish to use a copycenter, permissive license. If the programmer likes free software enough to decide to distribute her code freely, why would she decide to let other people make money from it? Of course, businesses like Microsoft or Apple will be thrilled to be able to use free code and turn it proprietary, but why let them?

The only answer I can find to that is that writing code and seeing others use it, even if the others make money from it, may feel like a big enough accomplishment. However, it does feel like a sucker’s payoff.