Change my mind.
Companies are just taking BSD code and don’t contribute to it. At the end they’re selecting Linux even if there’s licensing risk and they have contribute to code. Why? Because Linux have a lot of contributors, that makes it much more advanced system with more features. Also companies which want to support Linux don’t have to worry that someone would close their code or code they funded with money. It’s not about competition but collaboration. GPL license allowed us also to sell own open-source solutions.
FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD are behind Linux. I love that systems (especially OpenBSD), but I don’t see a point in contributing or donating to them. Instead of being ready to use solutions they’re trying to be base for commercial closed-source products and it would be great as contributors could get something from that, but they get nothing.
I understand that BSD see closed source as something cool and way to commercialize software, but in today times where a lot of devices have 24/7 access to internet, microphones, cameras and at the same time to sensitive data it’s extremely dangerous. Closed source is used to hide backdoors, acts of surveillance and keeping monopoly on market which obviously stop evolution of software.
Please tell me how BSD license can be good solution for operating system. It’s not about offending BSD, but as someone who love open source software I hate closed source software I would like to know how I can defend this license.
I mean as far as myself. I never got it. Im not really a developer but if im not being paid diretly for my work or building a business around it and keep the ip for myself. If im putting it out there I want to do share and share alike. Using bsd is great and im glad it exists but I would never put anything under the license myself if I was making the call.