That makes sense and is well argued. I want to agree with you with 100%, but something is nagging at me a bit. Just like free software that ends up in a paid p

That makes sense and is well argued. I want to agree with you with 100%, but something is nagging at me a bit. Just like free software that ends up in a paid product and then winning or settling in court because the company has more resources to use the judicial system, when we apply this directly as a societal value this starts to break down in practice. The freedom you are talking about ends up justifying (in practice) a situation that only provides real freedom for a small few that happened to take advantage early and use other asymmetries in society to consolidate control. Sure, we fix those we're all set! (maybe?) But until then perhaps we can agree that as a society we expect (and might ask for, by law) a little something extra from companies that have benefitted to help ensure others after them have a chance to use this freedom as well. My argument is not as well thought out at this point, I grant you. Thanks for providing me with a lot to think about.