"I think you have to consider the sort of equilibriums that are created. If, over time, people observe that the set of people who create software are not the same set of people who are making money on it - maybe not even making a living wage off their work - then people will cease to participate. This is one reason why the GPL is popular: it encourages people to participate because they won't feel "screwed"."
I don't know why these people would feel 'screwed'. Most developers don't understand or enjoy marketing. If someone comes along, re-packages your source code, and makes money on it, they are doing a good job at marketing and selling. This takes lots of time and effort.
If they want to make money on their code, they should sell it (or make it into an app).
As I've stated in my above comments, this doesn't sound like freedom to me. I'm allowed to use a person's source code, but only if I follow a strict set of rules (and they are going to feel screwed if I can do what they can't). The GNU is against most forms of commercialism. The FSF and the people supporting it just won't admit it.
I don't know why these people would feel 'screwed'. Most developers don't understand or enjoy marketing. If someone comes along, re-packages your source code, and makes money on it, they are doing a good job at marketing and selling. This takes lots of time and effort.
If they want to make money on their code, they should sell it (or make it into an app).
As I've stated in my above comments, this doesn't sound like freedom to me. I'm allowed to use a person's source code, but only if I follow a strict set of rules (and they are going to feel screwed if I can do what they can't). The GNU is against most forms of commercialism. The FSF and the people supporting it just won't admit it.
The BSD license supports true freedom.