As a developer of free and open source software with an interest in seeing my work remain as free for as many people for as long as possible, I really like the GPLv3.
As an industry developer, I have seen businesses shy away from the GPL 2 & 3 d software licesnsed as such, for exactly its core raison d'être, or take steps to circumvent it. They want to be able to ensure that they retain ownership and control of their work including the ability to keep it private as much as possible for as long as possible, and the GPL is an explicit hindrance to that.
"Copyleft" takes the position that the existing copyright system is fundamentally broken and uses those copyright tools in a subversive way to try to bring about what copyleft thinks is a better world.
I happen to agree that the copyright system is fundamentally broken, and while I don't know if copyleft's utopia is exactly the one I would pick, I like it better than the alternatives offered by other mainstream licenses.
As a developer of free and open source software with an interest in seeing my work remain as free for as many people for as long as possible, I really like the GPLv3.
The license doesn't affect your work. It threatens other people whose work happened to come in contact with (or appear similar to) your work.
"Copyleft" takes the position that the existing copyright system is fundamentally broken and uses those copyright tools in a subversive way to try to bring about what copyleft thinks is a better world.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Copyleft is instead the greatest apologist for the existing copyright system. It is an ideological beacon conditioning people to think that the free market is bad and government force is good. If GPLv3 had been more successful, we would have had ever-more restrictive licenses follow.
I happen to agree that the copyright system is fundamentally broken, and while I don't know if copyleft's utopia is exactly the one I would pick, I like it better than the alternatives offered by other mainstream licenses.
What "other mainstream licenses"? Proprietary software isn't even on my radar anymore. If someone decides to sell their soul to Microsoft or Apple, that's on them.
It's between copyLEFT vs copyFREE. The hijacking of the word "freedom" and legitimization of automagical contracts has far-reaching consequences.
Stallman isn't a programmer of software. He's a programmer of human beings!
3 comments
0 u/libman [OP] 11 Mar 2020 19:21
Boycott communist licenses!
Use genuine free software!
0 u/SpottyMatt 11 Mar 2020 22:40
As a developer of free and open source software with an interest in seeing my work remain as free for as many people for as long as possible, I really like the GPLv3.
As an industry developer, I have seen businesses shy away from the GPL 2 & 3 d software licesnsed as such, for exactly its core raison d'être, or take steps to circumvent it. They want to be able to ensure that they retain ownership and control of their work including the ability to keep it private as much as possible for as long as possible, and the GPL is an explicit hindrance to that.
"Copyleft" takes the position that the existing copyright system is fundamentally broken and uses those copyright tools in a subversive way to try to bring about what copyleft thinks is a better world.
I happen to agree that the copyright system is fundamentally broken, and while I don't know if copyleft's utopia is exactly the one I would pick, I like it better than the alternatives offered by other mainstream licenses.
0 u/libman [OP] 12 Mar 2020 01:35
The license doesn't affect your work. It threatens other people whose work happened to come in contact with (or appear similar to) your work.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Copyleft is instead the greatest apologist for the existing copyright system. It is an ideological beacon conditioning people to think that the free market is bad and government force is good. If GPLv3 had been more successful, we would have had ever-more restrictive licenses follow.
What "other mainstream licenses"? Proprietary software isn't even on my radar anymore. If someone decides to sell their soul to Microsoft or Apple, that's on them.
It's between copyLEFT vs copyFREE. The hijacking of the word "freedom" and legitimization of automagical contracts has far-reaching consequences.
Stallman isn't a programmer of software. He's a programmer of human beings!