GitHub is a profit generating entity. I don't see how you can fault any business for trying to make revenue by providing a service. Either they charge, or they show ads like Sourceforge and Wikipedia. Bring morals into a world of capitalism is silly; everything good must pay the bills to be sustainable.
Ok. I see where you're coming from there, but understand that at least in the US, companies have a legal obligation to be unscrupulous money making machines. Nothing, not one thing, can come between the bottom line.
> at least in the US, companies have a legal obligation to be unscrupulous money making machines. Nothing, not one thing, can come between the bottom line
Might want to talk to Amazon about that[0][1]. Also: nope[2].
Seriously - If you claim that you have to be an immoral asshole corporation driven by nothing but monetary success, you can find all sorts of reasons for it and the more money you have, the more you can invest in making it seem like you're "just following orders". But the main reason is that you're an sociopath and care more about money than you care about people. And yes, those people are destroying the fabric of our society proportional to the amount of money and power they wield.
I don't think asking for GitHub source to be open is the same thing as asking for a free service. They can charge all they want for using their service while having an open-source version for those who want to host it themselves.
