@gaz
145M

Seems like meme.

What’s wrong with GPL? It also has an actual legal body that protects it rather than something some basement nerd threw together with edgy flavor of the month words.

I’d argue that GPL is very anti-capitalism. The whole copyleft movement is to encourage community sharing and user freedoms which I find is the core value of open source software.

Dessalines
admin
45M

Yeah, the GPL is further left than this one, because it forces you to share / communalize the code.

This license just seems like a “promise” that you won’t try to make a profit off the code, rather than enforcing a de-privatization of it.

@ster
25M

It’s vague enough to just directly discourage people from using it, for risk of getting in trouble with the creator. This is not a free software license, and so it restricts people’s freedom, making it almost as bad as proprietary software.

@ster
15M

There are plenty of anti-capitalists out there whom I don’t trust to write code I don’t have the freedom to modify and check

nor does it require derived source code to be made available. The availability of source code is less important than the organization of software labor.

Hard pass. I don’t accept the premise that end-user freedoms are unimportant. I agree that the NPL/CNPL are better semi-free “ethical” licenses because they preserve copyleft.

@yogthos
creator
55M

Yeah, I agree with that. Source being available to end users is an important freedom.

@Micalet
95M

I do not like ANTI words, I like pro words. COOPERATIVES and FREELANCES LICENSE, or something like that banning CORPORATIONS from that FOSS use in the fine print would be a better tittle.

Also, COOPERATIVES impulse would be a great way out of COVID19 unemployment crisis as profits are so high compared with salaries that any group of workers with a little help from banks and or the administration for the capital needed, would generate more jobs - being its goal - than any corporation with the goal to improve profits even cutting jobs.

This is a good point, having a negative word in the main title sets a negative impression on people

@ster
85M

Just use the AGPL, GPL and LGPL. It’s tried and tested, and protects both the developer and user freedoms. We don’t need more licenses - they won’t fix problems inherent in society.

@yogthos
creator
75M

I generally agree, the fact that GPL is tested in court and has FSF behind it makes a very good choice. I just thought the idea of making an explicitly anticapitalist license was interesting.

@lnxprcy
75M

I’d love to hear Lawyers “audit” this, I don’t know much about law.

@yogthos
creator
25M

Yeah, I think having an actual lawyer go over the license would be important before using it.

@Echedenyan
55M

I think the CNPL is better.

@yogthos
creator
25M

I also found out about peer production license that seems to be in a similar vein

@ketchup
35M

Is there TL;DR for this? I can’t understand anything from the page.

How does one identify whether a program is used in capitalism or not? This seems like something completely unenforceable and just there as an idea rather than a real thing? Is this some sort of thought exercise?

As much as we would like to hate the capitalists, most of the FOSS funding and contributions come from either them directly or non-profits who are funded by them. If you are going 100% anti-capitalist, how will you survive and how will you eat your bread?

It’s more about we want to share our code/projects with other people, but we’re not very keen on letting them profit from our work.

I think the idea is to abolish capitalism.

Sounds too communistic

deleted by creator

All about open source software! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!