> In the "standard" GPL This is only true for GPLv2. GPLv3 fixed this problem, as well as many other real problems (though I don't agree that it is as big of a

> In the "standard" GPL This is only true for GPLv2. GPLv3 fixed this problem, as well as many other real problems (though I don't agree that it is as big of a problem as you claim). > The exception granted by FreeRTOS makes perfect sense in this light. Which exception is that? I read it as "this is kinda like the LGPL, but you also can't be 'competitive'". Also, none of this has anything to do with the statement "effectively free if you make no changes". Requiring you to provide the source does not make the software non-free.