3 ms·

The coercive behavior the FSF promulgates represents a narrow and openly ideological view of "freedom". Thankfully, there are other ways to share open-source s

The coercive behavior the FSF promulgates represents a narrow and openly ideological view of "freedom". Thankfully, there are other ways to share open-source software, ones that don't restrict options or create burdensome obligations for users & contributors.

vinceguidry 5y ago
Openly ideological is better than nakedly profit-seeking, which is mostly all the open source community offers.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
trelane 5y ago
What "burdensome obligations" does the GPLv3 impose on each group? I'm especially keen to know what restrictions the GPL poses for users.
- DangitBobby 5y ago
  I personally consider being forced to open-source derivitive software (or software that merely uses it) to be burdensome enough not to use GPL projects.
  - trelane 5y ago
    Yes, all software licenses impose restrictions. The GPL's restrictions ensure that the end user maintains their freedom, at the expense of developer freedom to choose their own, more restrictive (to the end user but also potentially to other developers) license, if they want to incorporate the Free Software into their own software. That is a tradeoff I'm cool with. I'm always a fan of ensuring end user freedom, including the right to repair. I will also note that the GPL is explicitly not an end-user license. You can do whatever you want with it yourself. It only covers distribution.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]