There's free for whom/what:
- the developer's freedom
- the user's freedom
... and there are also multiple time-scales of "free" (much as there are multiple timescales of "wealthy"):
- free for me proximally (when I've already got the code)
- free for me in the more distant future (when I might not)
For users, the GPL ensures both free-now and free-later.
For developers, one could argue that the GPL makes the trade-off of reduced freedom now (freedom to do what you want with the code you've currently got) for more freedom later (freedom here to at least get the code and then do what you want with it).
The strong case-in-point here is when a developer modifies some code, and then releases it, and would like to have the freedom to later build on contributions by others.
Is the trade-off worth it? This is now something of an empirical question.
There's free for whom/what: - the developer's freedom - the user's freedom
... and there are also multiple time-scales of "free" (much as there are multiple timescales of "wealthy"): - free for me proximally (when I've already got the code) - free for me in the more distant future (when I might not)
For users, the GPL ensures both free-now and free-later. For developers, one could argue that the GPL makes the trade-off of reduced freedom now (freedom to do what you want with the code you've currently got) for more freedom later (freedom here to at least get the code and then do what you want with it).
The strong case-in-point here is when a developer modifies some code, and then releases it, and would like to have the freedom to later build on contributions by others.
Is the trade-off worth it? This is now something of an empirical question.