>> If some wants to use it in proprietary software they cannot, because if they did they would be unable to then share it with their neighbor. > So he isn't fr

>> If some wants to use it in proprietary software they cannot, because if they did they would be unable to then share it with their neighbor. > So he isn't free to do what he wishes with the software. This is a common misconception with the GPL: you are actually allowed to use it together with proprietary software, including using it "in" proprietary software, as long as you use it, yourself. You just cannot distribute the combined software. As a result, the GPL improves your freedom as a user, but may encroach on your value-added-reseller freedoms. This is per design - the GPL allows the original author(s) of the software to limit the value that other people who do not own it can derive from selling it. This is something that is considered perfectly normal with other software - no one would expect to be able to use Microsoft Windows, or Oracle's database, in his proprietary software in the sense of "bundling it without giving Microsoft, or Oracle, anything in return". Since we live in the real world, where freedoms of different people may be mutually exclusive, ensuring the freedom of the user in all possible cases means to limit the freedom of the value-added-reseller in some of the possible cases. Complaining about this is a bit like saying that public libraries are limiting your freedom because you cannot sell the books you borrow from them.