| ▲ | nish__ 4 hours ago | |||||||||||||
No it doesn't. Most projects are MIT or some other permissive liscense. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | tredre3 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||
> Most projects are MIT or some other permissive liscense. Exactly, most projects have a license of some kind, they aren't "free-for-all-do-whatever." MIT requires attribution. Forcing enforcement of this cannot be done without copyright law. You can argue that attribution is stupid and nobody deserves credit for their work (which might be increasingly true in a post-LLM world), but you can't speak on behalf of all projects that chose those license and say "it's what they want!" | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||
| [deleted] | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | numpad0 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||
Aside what was already said: a lot of people do genuinely think GPL is a stupid idea that needs to go and Linux could have been licensed under MIT or even CC0; however, I think one should be cognizant of the fact that virtually no mass produced product other than Macs and PS4/PS5 use BSD and the rest uses Linux, often begrudgingly, but benefiting tremendously from both free-beer and forced-libre nature of it. | ||||||||||||||