The usual explanation is "four freedoms" and giving users freedom.
No, that's what all Free Software does. The GPL is an hack to extend them as widely as possible, by giving Free Software an advantage over proprietary code.
Leveraging network effects to create a communist shared ownership of the means of production is the honest explanation of the GPL, and that has nothing to do with 'freedom', and everything to do with network-enforced Marxist ideals.
There's no ownership here, only State granted monopolies. Property is an institution for allocating scarce resources; copyright is a government granted privilege designed to "promote Progress". The GPL is a way of defusing the crony system that takes away people's control of their own property - their machines. You're seeing Marxism where it doesn't exist.
On a related note, it's interesting to think that the USSR eliminated private property, yet they established and kept copyright - with fairly extensive terms, in fact.
I have no problem with copyright
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!" ;)
(By the way, I'm honestly sorry you're being downvoted. I find the attitudes of these cowards who downvoted based on disagreement rather disgusting.)
I downvoted him this time. Not only because I disagree, but also because espousing misinformation of that sort is genuinely damaging -- it's downright wrong, and calling something communistic carries a lot of negative connotations (whether justified or not).
But the worst part is, that argument sounds plausible at first glance. The marginal cost of data distribution is near-zero, and we've hit information post-scarcity. Reconciling that with traditional economic models is awkward. RMS/GNU already carry enough baggage, and without understanding their motivations, it's very easy to attach incorrect labels to them and their goals. You've been very eloquent in describing those, so thanks.
Well, then I think you should've replied and wrote that when downvoting.
Personally, I don't think downvoting is the appropriate response. Particularly, I don't think it would have the desired effect, since someone who might be affected by the supposed misinformation is unable to understand the reason behind the downvote, so they might make the same assumption that I did.
No, that's what all Free Software does. The GPL is an hack to extend them as widely as possible, by giving Free Software an advantage over proprietary code.
Leveraging network effects to create a communist shared ownership of the means of production is the honest explanation of the GPL, and that has nothing to do with 'freedom', and everything to do with network-enforced Marxist ideals.
There's no ownership here, only State granted monopolies. Property is an institution for allocating scarce resources; copyright is a government granted privilege designed to "promote Progress". The GPL is a way of defusing the crony system that takes away people's control of their own property - their machines. You're seeing Marxism where it doesn't exist.
On a related note, it's interesting to think that the USSR eliminated private property, yet they established and kept copyright - with fairly extensive terms, in fact.
I have no problem with copyright
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!" ;)
(By the way, I'm honestly sorry you're being downvoted. I find the attitudes of these cowards who downvoted based on disagreement rather disgusting.)