>>23680563You're confusing the typical "bad users" of BSD with the original author of the software.
I'm not saying BSD is more permissive from a consumer standpoint, I'm saying that code released under BSD is more free in the form it's released in, nothing else. It's not about consumers, it's about the author of the software.
There's a big sense of entitlement that you are automatically owed something in return for open source software so you want the changes if someone uses it. What if you just want to do it out of altruism and don't care what people do with it? You're not stopping them releasing their changes, but you're not stopping people in situations where they can't release source using it either.
The GPL is you saying, "I expect you to comply with a license and release any derivative works under that license"; you're forcing people to comply to your terms if people use your code, like a EULA does to end users.
Besides, the GPL doesn't work anyway. How many GPL compliant consumer products can you actually build firmware for? The spirit of the GPL touches on that, but the fact is all it's for is making sure derivative code stays free, regardless of how utterly useless it might be.
