[habnds]

Isn't this the point of "copyleft"? Create a valuable product, require that when someone builds on it, that what they create also be free to use.

Open source software fails like this even if it's valuable because fixes and improvements don't necessarily make it out into the open, whereas Free/libre software, if it's valuable, gets stronger over time because fixes and improvements must be available to everyone.

[WAHa_06x36]

Adding "fixes and improvements" to software haphazardly does not, in general, make it stronger. Quite often it can be the opposite.

Software projects need someone to maintain its course, make sure changes match the purpose of the software, and most importantly, reject changes that create a burden on the project.

[afarrell]

Not only that, but onboarding yourself into a new project/codebase can take a significant amount of effort.

[Seirdy]

The point of copyleft is more ideological; it prevents others from using your software to restrict user freedoms, thereby limiting the spread of harmful, nonfree software. Copyleft is primarily intended to protect users.