3 ms·

On “The GPL is hypocritical”: > At the same time the GNU project and FSF endorses and make heavy use of the GPL, which by its very nature is "nonfree" because

On “The GPL is hypocritical”: > At the same time the GNU project and FSF endorses and make heavy use of the GPL, which by its very nature is "nonfree" because it restricts what you can do with the software. Freedom isn’t about being able to act without restrictions, it’s about not living under oppression. Freedom itself is codified in laws that guarantee the right to free speech, free assembly etc. and these laws necessarily restrict the actions of the people. Free speech doesn’t mean anything if it doesn’t trump a police officer’s right to arrest you for speaking freely. You can’t effectively build a walled garden with GPL code. You can’t effectively build spyware or adware with GPL code. You can’t effectively build black-box IoT products with GPL code. All these dark patterns aren’t possible with GPL code because the GPL places restrictions on what you can and can’t do with it. And by licensing your library as GPL, you’re also ensuring that it’s not (legally) going to be used in any of these dark pattern scenarios. So yeah, the GPL places more restrictions on derivative works but ultimately gives users more freedom than the BSD-style licenses.

Proven 6y ago
> Freedom isn’t about being able to act without restrictions, it’s about not living under oppression GPL 3 is repressive. If you make changes to GPL 3.0 code used to run a service, you must release them or the copyfeftists can use oppressive institutions of the State to make sure you do. How is that not oppressive? > You can’t effectively build a walled garden with GPL code. > So yeah, the GPL places more restrictions on derivative works but ultimately gives users more freedom than the BSD-style licenses. "Restrictions on derivative works" is the same as restriction in "on users". Just keeping track of whether you modified GPL code used in external service (even if it's just a personal web site) is burdensome. If I want to build anything for myself, including my own walled garden, copyleft won't let me. I don't see how it "ultimately" gives me more freedom. Maybe that's the case in a world without private property - the freedom from property?) but thankfully we don't have that yet.

Proven 6y ago

> Freedom isn’t about being able to act without restrictions, it’s about not living under oppression GPL 3 is repressive. If you make changes to GPL 3.0 code used to run a service, you must release them or the copyfeftists can use oppressive institutions of the State to make sure you do. How is that not oppressive? > You can’t effectively build a walled garden with GPL code. > So yeah, the GPL places more restrictions on derivative works but ultimately gives users more freedom than the BSD-style licenses. "Restrictions on derivative works" is the same as restriction in "on users". Just keeping track of whether you modified GPL code used in external service (even if it's just a personal web site) is burdensome. If I want to build anything for myself, including my own walled garden, copyleft won't let me. I don't see how it "ultimately" gives me more freedom. Maybe that's the case in a world without private property - the freedom from property?) but thankfully we don't have that yet.