[Michael Chui]

Originally Posted by gberardi

However, the GPL's restrictions are there to enforce certain freedoms and ensure that they remain free. The MIT/BSD/ZLib licenses can't guarantee those freedoms since the author of derivative code can do whatever he/she wants, as you said.

When you get to the point of needing to guarantee freedoms, you've already gone back to the command and control model that stifles innovation.

As I understand the GPL, it is a way of enforcing one's beliefs on anyone who might want to use your code. Why do you do this? It's like saying that, if anyone wants to quote from my book, you have to agree with me first. It's absurd. If someone wants to use my code in a way I don't agree with, that's their right. That's freedom: their freedom. I'm not going to be uptight about how people aren't using my superior propaganda distributor to support the Republican party. (I'd write a counterworm. Somehow. )

It is perfectly alright for a political party to form advocating anarchy, oligarchy, etc. in a free democracy. That's the point: the view is there and permitted. And if everyone agrees on it, then it's the one we take. If everyone takes my code and closes up the gardens, then that's the way it is.

Freedom is not the freedom to have your way and everyone has to follow it. Freedom means that the people who you help have every right to slap you in the face in return, no gratitude required. They shouldn't. In the best case scenario, they'll see how awesome your viewpoint is and agree with you. But they are free to choose otherwise. They have to be.