GPL is only wrong because its viral nature infects truly free software that uses permissive licenses, stifling their growth. Its not bad because copyright is bad, its bad because it is hurtful to projects that wish to forfeit their copyright.
What do you mean you can't "merge". As in "you can't make derivative work, that allows future derivative work to be proprietary?". Yeah, that's the whole point?? You're not explaining how is that hurting someone who doesn't care about copyright or proprietary software. It only hurts someone who has premeditated intention to make a proprietary fork/derivative work.
That would depend on which varient of the GPL. In some cases you cant even link to the code, in other cases it includes derrivative work.
Yes I am aware that is the "whole point", and that whole point is why the vast majority of the open source community is dropping the GPL in preference of less viral licenses that do not hinder other open-source projects growth and development.
@freemo I think you might be a bit out of context here but anyway... you present yet another argument that would work in free software paradise(where GPL is moot anyway), but doesn't work in proprietary software hell that you don't realize you exist in (and the only known way out of it today is GPL).
How exactly does GPL hurt someone who doesn't care about copyright, I don't understand, can you explain that? It only hurts them, if their forfeited their right specifically with the intention for someone else to take over the project and make it proprietary.
@mewmew @kick @StaticallyTypedRice@mastodon.social