Free Software is an abject failure. It may sound like a good concept on its face—especially with the kind of language often used to describe the movement and its opponents—but, when put under scrutiny, the institutions and practices that make up the Free Software movement fundamentally fail at their stated goals and harm the software ecosystem as a result.
I mostly agree, but I think there’s a more charitable possible explanation here:
FSF failed because it got stuck in a local maximum. Copyright was a bad tool to protect the commons, but it was also the only tool available.
Maybe we could craft a policy which does a better job freeing up software while still protecting it from corporate hijacking? I’m not sure what it would look like.
It would require politcking. And charismatic speakers that can explain to lay people the importance of software freedom. You have to convince a whole hell of a lot of normies.
I mostly agree, but I think there’s a more charitable possible explanation here:
FSF failed because it got stuck in a local maximum. Copyright was a bad tool to protect the commons, but it was also the only tool available.
Maybe we could craft a policy which does a better job freeing up software while still protecting it from corporate hijacking? I’m not sure what it would look like.
It would require politcking. And charismatic speakers that can explain to lay people the importance of software freedom. You have to convince a whole hell of a lot of normies.