> It's a nice compromise for moving towards a more open world, without having to live in Stallman's communist utopia.
I'm going to go a little off topic here, but I think Open Source is being taken advantage of and needs to push harder. We've forgotten the warnings of Stallman.
AGPL does a decent job against hosted services. It's a shame cloud companies have co-opted various open source database and server products and ceased contributions back to the world. With the same hand, they lock people into their managed versions.
Another thing we need to fight against is providing software to companies that put users into walled gardens. We need licenses that require data export and right to forget. Encode the GDPR into our licenses.
Finally, we have to fight back against embrace, extend, extinguish. Apple is trying to take over computing and prevent us from running our own code on our own devices without going through their store. We should prevent them and anyone else trying to do this from using our software.
There's a lot we need to defend or we'll all wind up using opaque thin clients to access walled silos.
Yes, this is the correct way to fight Apple and such (even though I don't think they are a threat to open source). Don't let them use the software if they don't want to do it our way, just like they don't let us use the hardware if we don't want to do it their way.
> Another thing we need to fight against is providing software to companies that put users into walled gardens. We need licenses that require data export and right to forget. Encode the GDPR into our licenses.
Don't like walled gardens either. But imho the "fight against" should be done by (more flexible) political regulation and not by (rather inflexible) software licenses.
I don't understand why should we work hard to get all (or half, but that's still billions) people in the world to do this if we can simply write it into the license terms and use the already existing legal framework made exactly for this purpose. I also don't understand the claimed inflexibility, IP rights are one of the most flexible pieces of legislation I know, and your license can be as flexible as you wish too. On the other hand, what in the hell is flexible about laws made only for this purpose?
I'm going to go a little off topic here, but I think Open Source is being taken advantage of and needs to push harder. We've forgotten the warnings of Stallman.
AGPL does a decent job against hosted services. It's a shame cloud companies have co-opted various open source database and server products and ceased contributions back to the world. With the same hand, they lock people into their managed versions.
Another thing we need to fight against is providing software to companies that put users into walled gardens. We need licenses that require data export and right to forget. Encode the GDPR into our licenses.
Finally, we have to fight back against embrace, extend, extinguish. Apple is trying to take over computing and prevent us from running our own code on our own devices without going through their store. We should prevent them and anyone else trying to do this from using our software.
There's a lot we need to defend or we'll all wind up using opaque thin clients to access walled silos.