I don’t disagree, but I’m also not focused on the GNU aspect of this. In many cases, non-GNU stuff, like MUSL is actually better (in my opinion). My issue is with non-copyleft licenses. I’ve written alternatives to various GNU utilities because I find some of their behavior to be undesirable, but I license them under the GPL because I think that the alternatives are a net negative on society.
And I think that Canonical, like any other profit-driven entity, will do anything to increase their profit, and when they think they can get away with something shitty and they believe it will make more money, they’ll do that. Pushover licenses give them the option to restrict things more than if they relied on copyleft tools.
I don’t disagree, but I’m also not focused on the GNU aspect of this. In many cases, non-GNU stuff, like MUSL is actually better (in my opinion). My issue is with non-copyleft licenses. I’ve written alternatives to various GNU utilities because I find some of their behavior to be undesirable, but I license them under the GPL because I think that the alternatives are a net negative on society.
And I think that Canonical, like any other profit-driven entity, will do anything to increase their profit, and when they think they can get away with something shitty and they believe it will make more money, they’ll do that. Pushover licenses give them the option to restrict things more than if they relied on copyleft tools.