Everybody is an highly competitive field. Everybody wants to release as fast as possible. That's why everybody is using open source components. I know that everybody in the commercial field avoids GPL. Just curious which other licenses are on the blacklist of the some companies.
If I take a specific example, a AAA game like starcraft 2 uses something like 10-20 different open source projects, where the licenses are everything from personal granted permission, mit, to LGPL. I would also guess that some of those personal granted permission is actually bought permission from dual licensed GPL projects.
Not everyone are willing to go those lengths to save time and work. Not-invented-here is still going strong, as is FUD. If you are in a highly competitive field that can't afford NIH and FUD, then you can't afford a blacklist either.
Comments
Everybody is an highly competitive field. Everybody wants to release as fast as possible. That's why everybody is using open source components. I know that everybody in the commercial field avoids GPL. Just curious which other licenses are on the blacklist of the some companies.
If I take a specific example, a AAA game like starcraft 2 uses something like 10-20 different open source projects, where the licenses are everything from personal granted permission, mit, to LGPL. I would also guess that some of those personal granted permission is actually bought permission from dual licensed GPL projects.
Not everyone are willing to go those lengths to save time and work. Not-invented-here is still going strong, as is FUD. If you are in a highly competitive field that can't afford NIH and FUD, then you can't afford a blacklist either.