+bonifartius 𒂼𒄄
they want RMS gone to skinwalk the FSF because of the standard license header allowing for use of later versions:
> This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
they can just take any permissive garbage license, call it GPLv4 and do what they like.
@bonifartius gpl 3 doesnt allow military use?
:gondola_head: 🌿 
:ignutius: 
:stargate:
@mangeurdenuage@shitposter.world
@bonifartius @begsby Pretty much, if any license starts to restrain freedom then it's a slippery slope towards full proprietary, any people proposing any sort of stuff like that are tools to the corpos and co.
@mangeurdenuage @bonifartius is see, i was hooked to a real tin foil theory. But looks like im not the only one who likes the idea. https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#NoMilitary
@begsby @bonifartius
The thing is that you also have too look into the perspective of this.
The GPL is a legal contract. It has no god like power and people using it don't often want to emulate god like power thought automated omnipotence/omnipresence unlike proprietary entities who does that at every level, thus punishment can be instantaneous in those case unlike people who violate the GPL or other permissive licensing.
Meaning that evil people will do evil with the software even if it's GPL, but that doesn't mean the license shouldn't be enforced when people are caught doing so.
That's what I see Louis Rossmann fail to understand by wanting to do his own proprietary license on his side.
The thing is that you also have too look into the perspective of this.
The GPL is a legal contract. It has no god like power and people using it don't often want to emulate god like power thought automated omnipotence/omnipresence unlike proprietary entities who does that at every level, thus punishment can be instantaneous in those case unlike people who violate the GPL or other permissive licensing.
Meaning that evil people will do evil with the software even if it's GPL, but that doesn't mean the license shouldn't be enforced when people are caught doing so.
That's what I see Louis Rossmann fail to understand by wanting to do his own proprietary license on his side.
hostile take over and relicensing as motivation
