>Not quite. linux is the success of the past! but already corrupted by "tainted" kernel... > linux adopted GPL, which was unthinkable by corporate back then. B

>Not quite. linux is the success of the past! but already corrupted by "tainted" kernel... > linux adopted GPL, which was unthinkable by corporate back then. But because devs didn't cave in to "permissive license fallacy", they had to eat it up. True, I didn't expand on that to be more concise. Linux is a grandfathered treasure. Though there's an argument the corporations could use BSD like Apple, it's just more beneficial for the fragmented PC/Android ecosystem to maintain Linux sort of like an open ISO standard. Either way, this is not an easy story to replicate, unless something is essential on the level of Linux. I think with the way the situation develops, more and more people will be questioning permissive licenses as the no-brainer standard. I'm not saying there's no place for them, if you have a good business reason or something. Buy you don't have to unconditionally donate your labor to entities with nation-state-GDP-sized coffers. Copyleft alone won't solve the problems of the industry, but an expansion of its mindshare it would be a start.