A software license towards a world beyond capitalism.
  • gaz
    151·
    4 years ago

    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.

    • DessalinesA
      51·
      4 years ago

      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
        2·
        4 years ago

        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
          1·
          4 years ago

          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

  • adrianmalacoda
    10·
    4 years ago

    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.

  • Micalet
    112·
    4 years ago

    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.

    • SirLotsaLocks
      3·
      4 years ago

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

  • ster
    8·
    4 years ago

    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.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
      7·
      4 years ago

      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
    7·
    4 years ago

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

  • ketchup
    3·
    4 years ago

    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?

  • smart_jackal
    53·
    4 years ago

    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?