7 ms·
They care about the freedom of software users, not weird corporate policies. Non-adoption by non-respecters of freedom isn't a downside.
by yarrel 10y ago
They care about the freedom of software users, not weird corporate policies.
Non-adoption by non-respecters of freedom isn't a downside.
- wpietri 10y agoIt's a downside if it leads to general non-adoption, either directly or because a competitor with a different license gets the market share. I'm all for the moral stance, but moral purity in a vacuum is essentially irrelevant. Effective morality is about impact on the world. A morality that's only about the good feelings of the purist is sterile self-indulgence.
- sjwright 10y agoPrecisely. And even RMS has been known to agree with that principle. http://lwn.net/2001/0301/a/rms-ov-license.php3 http://lwn.net/2001/0301/a/rms-ov-license.php3
- Manishearth 10y agoThese aren't "weird corporate policies", they're very sensible. If they wish to use such software they need to be very careful in how, and track its use, and they just don't think having such a framework is worth it. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13342657 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13342657 , https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13342804 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13342804