| > I think the problem with this argument is that you think the user wants the source code. I want the source code, so I want developers to push for copyleft. I am a developer, so I push for copyleft on my end, for the others who want the source code like me. > even the best programmers would rather just pay money to not have to fix someone else's bugs I regularly need to patch some (open source) software I use. I probably couldn't pay for it (not sure if anyone would fix it for me), so I don't have a choice. The proprietary alternative is that I just can't have the damn software fixed. > If we're being pragmatic about what is good "for the user" then the best thing for the user is that there are as few obstacles as possible for developers to create products for the users to use. When you make it as easy as possible for developers, you end up with ElectronJS crap and similar. With proprietary protocols, nobody can write a different client (e.g. to make it more accessible). I don't consider this good for the user. > If a company doesn't like GPL, they'll simply not use GPL code, and maybe not using GPL means their product is not viable anymore First, there is not only GPL. The weakest copyleft I know is MPLv2, which requires to share the modified files. If a company's product is not viable under those conditions, then that product is simply worthless. Second, as an open source developer, I don't really give a shit if another company that is not paying me is not viable with my copyleft license. I am not working to help them make money while making the world less convenient for me. > I have to add this feels so awkward because every time there's a thread about AI you'll find someone saying that the fact that data is copy-able renders copyright a thing of the past It's not weird: I don't want AI to train from my code without permission. BigTech can abuse my licenses because they are too powerful for me to do anything about it. It's just a shameful workaround, and I am hoping that new licenses will come out that explicitly forbid ML training, so that I can update my licenses. > everyone's like "if you didn't want to get scrapped, shouldn't have posted it on the internet." I surely don't say that. People who say that have no idea how copyright works, there is nothing worth discussing there. |