Copyleft ensures that fixes, improvements, etc make it back into the main project. Permissive stuff allows capitalist behemoths to take your shit and run. The latter is personal preference. Some people care that their work is being passed onto others.
Adding to your reasons, I think copyleft is great because it prevents the code from being incorporated into proprietary anything. If you shitstains want to use my code while stripping the freedoms I intended it to have, fuck you!
Copyleft prevents corporations from contributing their stuff and it turns out corporations produce more useful Open Source software than political activists do.
Clang / LLVM is a good example of a permissive body of work that has attracted heavy investment from a number of corporate players that collaborate on its development out of their shared vested interest ( not the threat of legal action ). Despite starting literally decades after GCC, Clang has largely caught up and even surpassed it in some ways. This is especially true when you consider Rust.
Some of the largest, longest lived, and important components in the free software world are MIT licensed. Consider X.org which is now being replaced by Wayland ( also MIT ).
Sure, permissive licenses stop “your” contributions from being used by evil corporations. They also increase the chances that you get to use “their” contributions.
Can I ask why you prefer copyleft? I’m a big fan of permissive stuff.
Copyleft ensures that fixes, improvements, etc make it back into the main project. Permissive stuff allows capitalist behemoths to take your shit and run. The latter is personal preference. Some people care that their work is being passed onto others.
Adding to your reasons, I think copyleft is great because it prevents the code from being incorporated into proprietary anything. If you shitstains want to use my code while stripping the freedoms I intended it to have, fuck you!
Alternative view:
Copyleft prevents corporations from contributing their stuff and it turns out corporations produce more useful Open Source software than political activists do.
Clang / LLVM is a good example of a permissive body of work that has attracted heavy investment from a number of corporate players that collaborate on its development out of their shared vested interest ( not the threat of legal action ). Despite starting literally decades after GCC, Clang has largely caught up and even surpassed it in some ways. This is especially true when you consider Rust.
Some of the largest, longest lived, and important components in the free software world are MIT licensed. Consider X.org which is now being replaced by Wayland ( also MIT ).
Sure, permissive licenses stop “your” contributions from being used by evil corporations. They also increase the chances that you get to use “their” contributions.