I've said it before and I'll say it again: there is a place for permissive licenses. A great example is reference code for open standards, eg. TCP/IP.

[–] Lev@europe.pub 7 points 2 days ago

Permissive licences are useful compared to copyleft ones only for unfree actors, which we should fight integrally at every step of the way

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No, libraries should remain permissive IMO. Applications can be restrictive if they want to. I just don't see any point in a copyleft library or framework.

[–] Lev@europe.pub 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No unfree application should ideally be allowed ever again

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 days ago

World runs on them though. I don't mean business to consumer shit, all that can rot in hell. I mean business to business. There's shit out there that's incredibly niche, takes a ton of effort to develop, and there's no way it would ever be achieved without a huge financial incentive (because it's just so niche and it turns out paying tens or hundreds of people takes money). And someone's gotta pay the people writing all your open source code so most of them need day jobs anyway, which will be difficult to have without any commercial software existing. Sometimes the "all our code is GPL, but you can pay us to host it for you" model works, but a lot of the time it doesn't.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago

You'll take my code and have a nice life or so help me!