> There is absolutely no possible way that you can defend GPL as being more free than licenses like BSD/MIT. If you define free in terms of users and individua

> There is absolutely no possible way that you can defend GPL as being more free than licenses like BSD/MIT. If you define free in terms of users and individual developers, GPL is absolutely more free than BSD/MIT, but if you define it in terms of software development houses, MIT is much more "free" than the GPL indeed. The argument against the GPL having restrictions on what you can do with the code as to not take away freedom, is like the U.S Constitution having restrictions on what the government is allowed to do to restrict your freedom. Nobody would argue that the right to free speech is restrictive, because it takes away your right to restrict free speech, or would they?