Comment

Comment by MikeTaylor

This post is in most respects excellent, but it suffers from a fundamental problem. It starts from the assumption that the goal of free software is to be as widely used as possible, and that anything that prevents this is therefore Bad. But widest possible use was never the goal of the Free Software Foundation. They have always been about freedom first and software second, and Stallman has many times stated that he'd rather a program be used less if it results in more freedom, than vice versa.

So the goal of the various restrictions imposed by the GPL (in either of the main versions) is to increase freedom. We can usefully have a debate about how well they achieve that goal, and whether the increase in freedom is worth what has to be spent in order to achieve it. But if we do that, let's do it from a position of first having understood why the GPL says the things it does.

I saw this summed up an admirably concise way some years ago, but stupidly forgot to note whose soundbite this is: "Saying that the GPL is less free because it forbids proprietary derivatives is like saying the USA is less free because it forbids slavery". Yes, of course it's hyperbole to hold up freedom of software alongside the freedom of people; but this quote shows by example that more freedom doesn't always get achieved by less regulation but by more.

parent MikeTaylor 13 years ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton