Conversation

Matt 'msw' Wilson
@_msw_
The idea that the invention of non-Free "fauxpen" licenses for the purposes of protecting for-profit commercial interests might somehow the fault of GPL / copyleft advocates for using copyright to propagate and protect Software Freedom is ... quite something.
Quote Tweet
Daniel Micay
@DanielMicay
Replying to @DanielMicay @_msw_ and 4 others
Pushing restrictive licenses will lead to increasingly broad adoption of restrictive licenses. The only way you're going to convince people not to go down that path is convincing them that copyright is a bad idea. Many people won't follow any of these licenses anyway.
2
12
Daniel Micay
@DanielMicay
Replying to
@_msw_
Enforcing ridiculously arcane and poorly understood restrictions on software through a monopoly upheld by state violence is the opposite of protecting freedom. The entire Free Software movement is a sham. All they really protect are abusers not anyone's freedom.
Twitter Web App
Daniel Micay
@DanielMicay
Replying to
@DanielMicay
and
@_msw_
GPL is a non-free license restricting usage no matter how people try to spin it. It's not any more ethical or legitimate than those non-commercial licenses. 'Free Software' movement isn't somehow better because they value their carefully crafted cognitive dissonance over people.
Daniel Micay
@DanielMicay
Replying to
@icedwater
and
@_msw_
That's completely inaccurate. It's far more complicated than that and there isn't even consensus on the rules. GPL forbids you from doing things like using Linux kernel code as a reference in GNU coreutils. It's a major contributor to the fragmentation and technical issues.
1
1
Show replies
Show more replies