It isn't baseless you are simply blind to it because you are convinced
that the GPL is the best thing evah!
The GPL essentially strips the author of his/her rights. So here you
are slaving away writing some code that you give away and then on top of
that you have to forfeit your labor in favor of users. I hate to tell
you this but that is the wrong way around. If enough people realize
this they will either stop giving code away or switch licenses.
The only beneficiaries of such a license are large corporations. The
newer the GPL version the better in fact. Now you can give away code
without giving it away. You can essentially prevent other companies to
use it (TiVo clause) and some more rights to be given up on the patent
clauses. We can debate the merit of the people vs companies here but it
was either an unforeseen circumstance or a clever business trick. I put
my money on the unforeseen one. If I was to start a company that had
some software I'd buy the open source crowd by making my code GPLv3 and
yet keep all my patents and code safe; put real IP in hardware and sell
sell sell.
This is not what the RMS/FSF tells you do. They say things like it's
free! you are doing society a favor! non-gpl code is evil and unethical
etc. These slogans are nothing but cover ups for the growing empire
that is the FSF (yes lots of people forfeit their rights to them not
knowing what they are giving up and no benefit to boot).
That is not how I see this. One side came to slander (not the first
time either) and the other side kept correcting the slanderer. There
might have been some strong words going back and forth but only one side
was wrong. Lets call it self-defense.
Popular does not mean good. VHS anyone?
As I said before the GPL is sold on false premises and unfortunately a
lot of people stop thinking by the time they hear "free as in beer",
"can't be closed", "unethical code" etc. These slogans are not true and
are used to sell something that is of no benefit to the author. Roughly
the same way that communism was sold to the people. That is where the
FSF stands today. They outlived their usefulness and really should have
closed shop but instead they reinvented themselves with new goals. This
also happens in the business world. For example, In the past unions
created some real benefit for workers and today are shills for someone
in power.
Let me quote my man Franklin:
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary
Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
Where the GPL is temporary safety in trade of Essential Liberty.
Then don't stand by them by not replying to this. By adding to this
thread you picked a side like it or not.
