You're viewing a single thread.
I remember back when I thought all FOSS was part of the FSF, and that itself was formed of hippie liberal progressives. Had a rude awakening when I found about the MIT vs GPL rift, and then another on HN when I realised half the people in software were just there to make money.
I had a period where I didn't really understand the GPL or what it was trying to do. All I knew is that it was ""viral"" (whatever the hell that meant!) and that, supposedly, trying to use it would forever bind you and your creation to who knows what unforeseen legal horrors. I mean, look how long it is! It's frightening! I wanted absolutely nothing to do with it at first.
Then I got a clue and actually read it. It's quite straightforward. For almost all serves and purposes it's basically just MIT plus copyleft. All the legal density is just an effort to squash every conceivable loophole to the copyleft directive. I'm no longer afraid of it, I think it's pretty cool.
The thing I want to know now is why so many projects think their shit don't stink and that they need to pollute the FOSS ecosystem with their own stupid permissive license that is functionally identical to the MIT license.
Could be they like the idea of being in control of the license or something like that
Could also have to do with running a gauntlet of lawyers to be allowed to open some code you wrote.