
Stallman's Law - crazypython
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/stallmans-law.html
======
benjaminjosephw
This is why the MIT license is more problematic than it appears on the
surface. Freedom that doesn't defend the rights of those without power (end-
users) is only going to reinforce the status-quo and give the powerful more
leverage.

End-user friendly technology requires a better approach than laissez-faire
software production even though it seems simple and innocuous enough. Perhaps
we need to revisit the debates of the past in the context of what we know now
about how influential and manipulative technology can be?

~~~
colejohnson66
I think the big problem people have with the GPL is its viral nature; It
“infects” everything it touches. I’ve heard this complaint many times from
developers.

So, for a hypothetical Program A using Library B, MIT sacrifices user freedom
(access to code for A) for developer freedom (ability to use B without open
sourcing A). GPL, OTOH, sacrifices _developer_ freedom for _user_ freedom.

When I started looking at less “viral” licenses (such as MIT, BSD, etc.) like
this, it made sense _why_ developers would prefer not to use the GPL. I don’t
think it’s right, but it makes sense.

~~~
lucasyvas
Only speaking personally, I've never felt this way about the GPL. The virality
is a feature that I really like as a developer. It ensures the changes stay
open which is the true nature of open source for me.

I find that business is the first to scoff at this, but just because your
software is GPL doesn't mean your code can be readily "stolen". There's plenty
of complexity in actually getting that code to users that can make it quite
difficult for others to replicate your success.

That said, there are licenses that I also like that are weaker, like LGPL and
MPL 2.0.

I'm often surprised MIT is chosen. Apache 2.0 is more robust due to
explicitness.

~~~
beagle3
> There's plenty of complexity in actually getting that code to users that can
> make it quite difficult for others to replicate your success.

That's true when the competitors are of comparable size/ability. Not
necessarily equal, but still comparable on a similar scale.

However, the likes of Amazon, Google, Microsoft easily take e.g. Redis or
Postgres or Mongo or a variety of other products, and "get that code to users"
by SaaS means -- which they can do at least as well as the original
developer/copyright-holder, and their "vertical" integration (e.g. AWS) makes
their offer superior to the original developer.

(They can easily do the same without the source code, by developing their own
clean-or-mostly-clean-room implementation, but the internal barrier for them
to do that is much, much higher).

------
schappim
Stallman's Law:

“Now that corporations dominate society and write the laws, each advance or
change in technology is an opening for them to further restrict or mistreat
its users.”

