Armin Ronacher once put it like this (quoting from memory), why should I choose GPL if I don’t plan on enforcing copyleft?
The GPL is an attempt at software freedom by restricting freedoms to have a lever that leads to greater overall freedoms.
In some way it has worked for the Linux kernel if you look at contributions wrt drivers. But I am not sure so much that it worked so well for other aspects
Because first, it's self enforcing since GPL is court tested, second it's also a stance.
I choose GPL, because I do not code these tools with my programmer hat. I code them on my free time, primarily for myself, to be used by people who appreciate the work went into them and find these tools beneficial.
These tools, while vary in sophistication, are high quality items which are built for their users, and not open to be monetized by another company just because they can build something with or on top of it.
I have no qualms with Open Source software when done honestly. Most of today's Open Source projects are not honest.
Try to deploy a service or compile an Open Source tool solely from the provided source code. 99.99% of the time you'll wish that you land flat on your face, which would be easier and less painful.
I choose GPL, because not only I promise that you'll be able to build the thing I released, I promise that I'll make it buildable with minimum fuss and effort as much as possible.
What I put out is complete opposite of a run of the mill Open Source Software. Free, easy to understand, easy to build, no moats whatsoever. It's a gift instead of a window dressing. It's a free offering with no strings attached instead of "fix our code, so you might get internet cookie points in return". It's crafted instead of produced.
The GPL is an attempt at software freedom by restricting freedoms to have a lever that leads to greater overall freedoms.
In some way it has worked for the Linux kernel if you look at contributions wrt drivers. But I am not sure so much that it worked so well for other aspects