Let's be real concrete here with no analogies: I asked you to define what you see as abuse? Give me concrete examples. I explicitly pointed out to you a socia

Let's be real concrete here with no analogies: I asked you to define what you see as abuse? Give me concrete examples. I explicitly pointed out to you a social norm, not a violation of contract. I did not define it as breaking a contract or law. I defined it in terms of the social norm that was set by the creator of the license, or the "spirit" of the license. I want to understand what you see as "violation of that spirit", not the legal definition. As mentioned, most definitions i've seen here are explicitly not what the creator of the license intended (again, not what they wrote down, but what they intended). It's hard to see something that doesn't violate the spirit of the license as abuse. For example, i often hear about "not contributing back" to GPL projects. RMS explicitly was okay with "not contributing back" in the broader sense, as long as they released their source code. He had no expectation he would get anything other than a pile of source that he would have to deal with. He just wanted to be able to hack it, so as long as it had the right stuff, he didn't expect others to care. He thought it would be nice for sure, but it's not "abuse". (A great concrete example of abuse is usually binary kernel blobs that have deliberate shim interfaces. This clearly violates the spirit of the license even if the license says it may be okay.) So far i haven't seen what you have defined as abuse especially by "large companies". Additionally, I pointed out to you the notion that large corporations are the ones doing the abusing is wrong under almost all definitions of abuse, spirit, legal, aspirational, you name it.