• @gaz
    link
    144 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
      link
      44 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
        link
        24 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
          link
          14 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
    link
    10
    edit-2
    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.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
      link
      54 years ago

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

  • @Micalet
    link
    9
    edit-2
    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
      link
      34 years ago

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

  • @ster
    link
    84 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
      link
      74 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
    link
    74 years ago

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

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
      link
      24 years ago

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

  • @ketchup
    link
    34 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
    link
    24 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?