@masterofthetiger@theres.life To the contrary, I think his standard of morality is clear (if incomplete): freedom, which is to be enjoyed up to the point that it coerces someone else's. What's less clear is the principle that leads someone to affirm that someone is free to view source code but not free to view pornography (even though you and I may find this to be an immoral thing to do).

@masterofthetiger@theres.life Indeed, even more disturbing to me is the thought that not only is source code open, but it _must_ be open, and anyone who refuses to share it will be compelled under force of law to do so (this is what the GPL does). The code is "free" perhaps, but the users and developers are not, which leads me to think that someone has put the cart before the horse with regard to what freedom in software means (or at least ought to mean).