> I admire the desire to make source code transparently available, and let people use it for free, but I think strict open source is the best net good for the world we live in.
Genuinely open source is also a better defense against lawsuits.
If the code is open source, some big company can sue, but the end users have rights as well as the code copyright holder. They're going to have to prove what code is being used and someone is likely to write code around the issue immediately. Sure, lots of people could get sued, but it's either not going to be worth it or someone with a big wallet is going to get involved which puts an immediate stop to things.
If the code isn't completely open source, then a lawsuit from a big company to a small one demanding a pulldown has a LOT more force since end users have no rights in that case at all (see what happened to Our Machinery).
Genuinely open source is also a better defense against lawsuits.
If the code is open source, some big company can sue, but the end users have rights as well as the code copyright holder. They're going to have to prove what code is being used and someone is likely to write code around the issue immediately. Sure, lots of people could get sued, but it's either not going to be worth it or someone with a big wallet is going to get involved which puts an immediate stop to things.
If the code isn't completely open source, then a lawsuit from a big company to a small one demanding a pulldown has a LOT more force since end users have no rights in that case at all (see what happened to Our Machinery).