I'm torn. I understand the benefits of enforcing user freedom. But it's not clear to me that users aren't better served by the ubiquity of re-use that the more

I'm torn. I understand the benefits of enforcing user freedom. But it's not clear to me that users aren't better served by the ubiquity of re-use that the more permissive licenses have encouraged. For example, permissive licenses have helped with the walled garden that is iOS. But would end users be better off if we hadn't had iOS? If it were GPL'd, sure, but in reality it would never have been. So is its existence, and the competition it fostered with Android, net beneficial to users? Maybe more concretely, I feel that the deliberate hamstringing of GCC wrt a published IR to be, well, wrong. Again, I understand the arguments and I appreciate the reasoning but it's not clear that the end user is best served by this. For me, at least, it probably comes down to the simple statement that, as much as I value end user freedom, it isn't always the most beneficial thing for the end user. On a different day, mind, I'd probably argue the other way...