While I wrote this with the Software Freedoms in mind, which the GPL is an expression of, I'm only using it as a model for discussion. I'm not explicitly saying

While I wrote this with the Software Freedoms in mind, which the GPL is an expression of, I'm only using it as a model for discussion. I'm not explicitly saying "license under the GPL". So with that said, the GPL does not say "put your code up on Github". It says "give your code to your users". It also doesn't say "don't charge for your software." I'm talking about taking these ideas literally. The only people who get your software from you are people who have paid, and they get the source code along with it. People have always surmised that, because of Software Freedom #2 (redistribution), they could turn around and release your code for free, so the majority of people have defaulted to just releasing their code, in the open, for free. I question whether or not that would actually be the case, or how big of an impact it would have. I'm also not really sure I like Freedom #2 in its most explicit sense. I am starting to think that I'd prefer to operate under a model where anyone may modify My Code as they want (Freedom #1), and release the modifications as they see fit (Freedom #3), but the original base of it all, My Code, they need to get from me. In the context of "getting paid", I think that model might work better. But that's more of a minor detail. I'm not saying "hide your code". I'm just saying, "stop leaving it laying around." Yes, the world has benefited greatly. But Google and Facebook seem to have benefited more.