3 ms·
I think what you're describing here is more like free/libre software and not open source, although the lines between those terms have become fuzzy. IMO, open so
by saila 4y ago
I think what you're describing here is more like free/libre software and not open source, although the lines between those terms have become fuzzy. IMO, open source is pretty much all about expecting something in return.
- sigg3 4y agoFree software isn't not commercial software. The GPL _encourages you_ to get paid for software. Free software is not good because of charitable reasons, or any contingent historical artefact. Counterfactually you can imagine a world without patents and software licenses, but the GPL would still be needed as a philosophical concept. Free software (in FSF / libre sense) is traditional Kantian philosophy, viz. everyone takes part of the whole by attending to their own needs, the Kingdom of Ends. What's not Good -- and in software what the GPL intends to prevent -- is any action that superficially might benefit the actor but undermines the whole (and ipso facto the actor) in the long run. Making money with proprietary software is a Wrong because proprietary software undermines the activity of writing software at all. This is my understanding of it anyway YMMV.