> exploit gaps in Open Source licensing Allowing others to fork for profit and give nothing back is entirely the point of permissive licenses. "Permissive" me

> exploit gaps in Open Source licensing Allowing others to fork for profit and give nothing back is entirely the point of permissive licenses. "Permissive" means exactly that developers are permitted to give nothing back. Licenses without this permission are generally copyleft. > The permissiveness of open source was one thought to be "we can all succeed together" Not at all. That's the spirit of copyleft. The spirit of permissive licenses is that "I don't want developers to have to give anything back." Usually this is done to deliberately allow private companies to profit off of the work without having to disclose their proprietary improvements. That is, presumably, why MIT and Berkeley licenses are permissive: they moved IP out of the university system into silicon valley as a type of indirect economic stimulus.