> There's so much unexplored space in licenses [...]

Am I wrong that this is orthogonal to "pick a side"? It sounds like you're suggesting that the sides themselves are inappropriately drawn.

▲

nananana9 2 days ago | parent [-]

If the issue is that large entities are using the software without contributing back in a way that goes against the "spirit of the law", the only solutions I can see license-wise are ones that restrict usage, which marks them squarely in the not-FOSS camp.

I do believe the line is inappropriately drawn, but I also have a lot of respect for what the open source/free software movements have achieved and won't spit in their face by trying to move the line or highjack the labels.

	▲	spwa4 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Yeah, and that they are always searching for ways to get out from under even their minimal obligations. For example, the practice now of "AI reimplementation" (ie. uncopyrighting) free software using AI, and training LLM models on free software without respecting the license while simultaneously claiming that the same is absolutely not allowed on their software. Oh and not only can you not train AI on their software "without permission", you can't even use their software through AI (Microsoft)