> > 1. Important site functionality does not work without running nonfree JavaScript. (C0) > Contradicts what you say. ... no it doesn't. GitHub has server co

> > 1. Important site functionality does not work without running nonfree JavaScript. (C0) > Contradicts what you say. ... no it doesn't. GitHub has server code and has JavaScript code that is sent to the client for the client to execute on the user's machine. This requirement is referring to the client code not the server code. The former is more of a matter of user freedom than the latter. More importantly this requirement doesn't even require GitHub to make their JavaScript free, they just have to make their site work with JavaScript disabled. I'm not sure how you could possibly read the requirement as saying "all server code that GitHub has must be free software"... > Both are abiding by laws restricting access to that content. If you have an issue with that perhaps talk to the relevant governments. GitLab doesn't get a ding for this requirement, so clearly this statement may be true but it doesn't seem like you are required to act the way GitHub does by law. > So to counter your point one issue is because they're using non free software, one reason is out of their control They have written proprietary software and sell it. I admit that it's hard to fix this problem if you already have proprietary code (contractors retain copyright in some cases), but pretending like they were completely at the mercy of someone else is ridiculous.