Where that isn't the case nobody is seeking to replace code due to license reasons. E.g. you don't see Linux people trying to replace X11 or Sendmail because of their licenses. But the BSD systems are actively trying to phase out GPL licensed code due to not liking the license.
Anyway, here's why I support Linux and the GPL: the WRT54G. Linksys would have never released the source code for the router's kernel without being forced to. But when they did it, an amazing thing happened, third-party developers made their product one of the most popular wireless routers ever. With open source, everyone benefited -- users got better products, hackers had fun, an d Linksys made more money.
If Linux was BSD-licensed, the WRT54G would be a long-forgotten relic of the past.
Relicensing linux is not an option, whether you believe GPL is good or not.
There are solutions to this, but you have to act in advance: for example if you want to contribute code to the clojure open source project, you have to sign and send by snail mail a contributor agreement (http://clojure.org/space/showimage/ca.pdf) which regulates the ability of the project funder some freedom in relicensing.
btw, this formality, especially the printing and snail mail thing, actually stopped me from contributing my code to clojure-contrib. You know, I just wanted to quickly share a bugfix, I don't know in advance how much involvement I will have with something which starts only as a side effect of my job
furthermore since I made the contribution during my daily job, my company itself would have to sign that contract etc etc, licensing some stuff with GPL is one thing, granting unrestricted sublicensing right is a different issue ...
This is a pot-kettle situation if there ever was one.
The effect of Sun licensing dtrace, ZFS and others as GPL-compatible would make Linux more competitive with Sun's Solaris. That's clearly undesirable. Sun faces a lot of competition from IBM and HP, both with offers to migrate to AIX/HP-UX and to Linux on x86 hardware. Enhancing Linux was a big no-no for them.
Yes
> That's clearly undesirable
Why? Sun's been bleeding customers towards Red Hat and (to a far greater extent) Novell since the early 2000s. Holding onto the Solaris/SPARC combo in the hope the high end customers would the be last to leave (which they were, but sooner than Sun expected) killed the company.
Giving Dell all the tools to fight SPARC/Solaris effectively would only kill it faster.
As a high-end hardware manufacturer, they were pressed from below by Linux on cheap x86 hardware. One possible solution would be to press back with SPARC/Solaris hardware at x86 prices. Sticking to the high-end may be a good strategy, but that's why IBM does not make an x86 version of zOS.
And that's why they lawyer to shreds anyone who tries to sell and support zOS on emulated zSeries hardware.