@masterofthetiger@theres.life I disagree with the Free Software movement's ideas of free software. 😉 I think open source code is great, I think claims that people or companies "own" code are absurd, and any license which restricts what I can do with my software (whether it's a EULA or the GPL) under threat of violence is immoral.
Philosophy I
Philosophy II
Philosophy II b
Philosophy II b
@danielst to the third point, I would say 1) contra Mt. 10:8, I didn't say that it's ethical to hoard code. Sharing code is certainly the most ethical way to develop. But compelling people to share code constitutes something unethical too.
Most certainly the GPL is not a burden on users. But I would disagree with the notion that the GPL made Linux thrive--Linux thrived in spite of the GPL. The decline in Linux Foundation lawsuits prosecuting GPL violations shows this.
@masterofthetiger@theres.life
@danielst @masterofthetiger@theres.life With regard to the first point, certainly. Age of consent is a culturally flexible concept. I think it's an important one, but not one that we have a dogmatic answer for. So, I don't find RMS's assertions here to be profoundly problematic. I'll happily concede the second point also: it's absurd to suggest that an arbitrary distinction of geography or chronology renders an act unethical. Raping someone is reprehensible no matter where or when it's done.