Maybe we simply disagree. I don't think software, personified, has the capability to appreciate freedom. And, I think both the FSF and Stallman think the same[1

Maybe we simply disagree. I don't think software, personified, has the capability to appreciate freedom. And, I think both the FSF and Stallman think the same[1][2]. Apple lost (or, more accurately, never had) the freedom to distribute VLC under the terms and conditions of the App Store. And the end users cannot get VLC from the App Store; though, it's readily available from other sources. Whether or not Facebook users see themselves as running software isn't relevant to the argument. A person who licenses their software under the AGPL does view it that way. Therefore, if you choose to host that software, you're required to redistribute the source code. The AGPL doesn't restrict your ability to use the software on a network-connected computer. It does, however, require you to distribute the source code to any other users who use the software. If you don't want to distribute the code, then don't let other people use the software over the network! I don't think it would be ridiculous to want the source to a server-- whether or not I had an account on it. But, I'm a curious guy. I also agree that there is a lot of value in the account and identity. But, that's a different issue than the software and its license. The id software games all had previously existing ecosystems. However, I was specifically referring to the ecosystems around the engines. Those improvements, derivatives, and the insight into a professional game engine were only possible after those releases. And I think that Quake's position as the often first-ported game to new game systems is a good testament. Quite frankly, your argument confuses me because you claim the software itself is of limited value while simultaneously taking umbrage at being required to redistribute it. [1] "Free software is a matter of the users' freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software." http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html [2] "Authors often claim a special connection with programs they have written, and go on to assert that, as a result, their desires and interests concerning the program simply outweigh those of anyone else—or even those of the whole rest of the world. ... To those who propose this as an ethical axiom—the author is more important than you—I can only say that I, a notable software author myself, call it bunk." http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-free.html http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-free.html