[archgrove]

Well sure. If you basically redefine Malware to be "Anything other than GPL software", then you're going to consider most software malware. That doesn't mean it's the definition of Malware that most (i.e. all) other people will use, and it doesn't really advance the discussion. It mostly continues to make GNU look like fringe lunatics.

Moreover, whilst I don't really object to hyperbole in pursuit of a crusade, I don't greatly appreciate this type of cross-talk. It's hard enough to keep family members free of actual malware without confusing them with comments like "iOS itself is malware".

[asfglionio]

GNU seems to define anything that works against the interests of the user as malware. That's a broad but by no means crazy definition, and it it interesting that a lot of "legitimate" proprietary software is malware by that definition.

And, in this case, they seem to be using an even narrower definition than that. The things listed on this page are considerably worse than just using the wrong license.