After continuous debacles involving degradation of FOSS or user freedom, would not one of the best ways to materially and philosophically fight back be through effective licensing?
I have to a large degree ignored licensing. I remember being annoyed when RMS would pop up talking about GPL, its versions and not wanting to spend the brain energy in truly understanding the nuances. Additionally, when in the trenches of day-to-day coding, debates about FOSS licenses seems like pleasantry compared to the mule you're stuck beating day-to-day.
Clawing my way to the surface from this trench, I realize this man was fucking right about an awful lot regarding the freedom of software and data. His assertions that our continued abdication of our data and privacy rights is dangerous are absoluutely right. That shit is hard, though, dog.
I'm making a new effort to see how I can attach more FOSS-oriented licenses that restrict larger companies from using my work without being held to the same standards I hold myself. Problem is, when they want to break the rules, they sic' their lawyers after you and have unlimited money to do so allowing you very little recourse.
Perhaps attaching GPL3 on everything won't be enough to protect it in posterity. If this post weren't off the cuff, I'd imagine folks have done research on whether a certain amount of GPL code has been violated to various degrees. (I wouldn't doubt many instances this is done unknowingly-so)
I think I've been lazy in putting BSD on everyting. Partly it's because the license is funny to me. It says your software may not be good for anything at all! Unforunately I think this "Whatever, man." approach to licensing cuts slack to organizations that would otherwise not cut you any 'tall.
Practical takeaways: I need to figure out
- Find a FOSS product-level license for free services I host on the web
- Find a FOSS library-level license for systems programming (C/C++)
- Find a FOSS library-level license for web programming