My personal opinion is we should be clear about why many companies are not contributing to or shipping GPLv3 software. The schism over GPLv3 was widely known a

My personal opinion is we should be clear about why many companies are not contributing to or shipping GPLv3 software. The schism over GPLv3 was widely known and discussed at the time the license was being drafted. Many companies told the FSF they would not be able to continue shipping or contributing under those terms. The FSF chose their own path and moved their projects to the new license, with predictable consequences. I happen to think it's an unfortunate footgun that set back the free software movement but I can see why others might disagree. I also agree that the FSF was within their rights to make such changes. The FSF bears responsibility for the decision to prioritize perceived "anti-TIVO" concerns over unification of the free software movement.