Copyleft is a mirror of copyright, not a way to fight copyright. It grants rights to the consumer where copyright grants rights to the creator. Importantly, it gives the end-user the right to modify the software running on their devices.

Unfortunately, there are cases where you simply can't just "re-implement" something. E.g., because doing so requires access to restricted tools, keys, or proprietary specifications.

▲

ordu 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

These are words of Stallman:

"So, I looked for a way to stop that from happening. The method I came up with is called “copyleft.” It's called copyleft because it's sort of like taking copyright and flipping it over. [Laughter] Legally, copyleft works based on copyright. We use the existing copyright law, but we use it to achieve a very different goal."

https://writings.hongminhee.org/2026/03/legal-vs-legitimate/

	▲	dathinab 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> flipping it over. i.e. mirroring it > use it to achieve a very different goal." "very different goal" isn't the same as "fundamentally destroying copyright" the very different goal include to protect public code to stay public, be properly attributed, prevent companies from just "sizing" , motivate other to make their code public too etc. and even if his goals where not like that, it wouldn't make a difference as this is what many people try to archive with using such licenses this kind of AI usage is very much not in line with this goals, and in general way cheaper to do software cloning isn't sufficient to fix many of the issues the FOSS movement tried to fix, especially not when looking at the current ecosystem most people are interacting with (i.e. Phones) --- ("sizing"): As in the typical MS embrace, extend and extinguish strategy of first embracing the code then giving it proprietary but available extensions/changes/bug fixes/security patches to then make them no longer available if you don't pay them/play by their rules. --- Through in the end using AI as a "fancy complicated" photocopier for code is as much removing copyright as using a photocopier for code would. It doesn't matter if you use the photocopier blind folded and never looked at the thing you copied.
	▲	sarchertech 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		That’s not a rebuttal of the OP’s point. None of that says anything about fighting copyright. It literally says he flipped it which is wha the OP said when they said it’s a mirror.

▲

rileymat2 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> It grants rights to the consumer where copyright grants rights to the creator.

It also grants one major right/feature to the creator, the ability to spread their work while keeping it as open as they intend.