"You want to maximize the number of people who use your code, because that makes you feel good about yourself and your contribution.
Someone who releases GPL wants to try to maximize the good outcomes that result from their releasing that piece of code."
There is a bit of strawmanning going on here. It's not Roark versus Toohey. Copyleft was conceived out of Stallman's personal desire to access source code for his own ends. Likewise one can reasonably believe as a practical that the benefits of widespread use of a piece of code outweigh those from its source code availability. The two positions approach utilitarianism from different philosophical positions. One places more emphasis on actions the other on rules.
Perhaps most of us might agree that the ideal would be widespread adoption, open source, and equitable compensation of the author. Fewer would agree that this ideal is the norm in our shared world. Copyleft carries a lot of overhead. Could effort spent on license compliance be better spent elsewhere?
Copyleft solves a set of problems. That set of problems were pressing in the computing community of thirty years ago - at least once one got away from Vic-20's and Apple II's. Copyleft made an important contribution in the form of GNU/Linux. But the question remains, is its incompatibility with the world of smartphones creating a drag on innovation?
Someone who releases GPL wants to try to maximize the good outcomes that result from their releasing that piece of code."
There is a bit of strawmanning going on here. It's not Roark versus Toohey. Copyleft was conceived out of Stallman's personal desire to access source code for his own ends. Likewise one can reasonably believe as a practical that the benefits of widespread use of a piece of code outweigh those from its source code availability. The two positions approach utilitarianism from different philosophical positions. One places more emphasis on actions the other on rules.
Perhaps most of us might agree that the ideal would be widespread adoption, open source, and equitable compensation of the author. Fewer would agree that this ideal is the norm in our shared world. Copyleft carries a lot of overhead. Could effort spent on license compliance be better spent elsewhere?
Copyleft solves a set of problems. That set of problems were pressing in the computing community of thirty years ago - at least once one got away from Vic-20's and Apple II's. Copyleft made an important contribution in the form of GNU/Linux. But the question remains, is its incompatibility with the world of smartphones creating a drag on innovation?