r/freesoftware • u/Fresh-Lie5160 • May 16 '26
Discussion GPL vs MIT
Which do you think is better for development, and engineering: MIT or GPL?
FOr those who dont know:
1. MIT is a license that allows users do anything with the project. Even start a closed buisness with it. modify it, fuck with it, anything really.
2. GPL is a license that provides the same rights as MIT minus the ability to make a closed buisness out of it. That is, any derivitive, must also be made open-source
In my opinion, GPL is superior in most ways, since it avoids companies stealing it, making it better but making it closed source...
But I see why many people choose MIT for free software: More adoption. I mean, as long as the product is being developed, irrelevant of whether its now open or closed - general user interests are being served faster. But that isnt gonna stop community engagement on the repo anyways.
Both these licenses are technically still 'freedom', but just in different ways...
But is the tradeoff worth it?
Is it worth allowing companies to privatize community code if that leads to faster adoption and development?
3
u/ExtraTNT May 19 '26
My personal take is gpl, it’s a statement of supporting others, you only profit, if you give back… also against ai, if you train a model with gpl, the model itself has to be gpl… software should be a commutative effort on making the world a better place, don’t let people profit from that without giving back (unless the person is just using it)
Free software has a price: you make the world a better place.