is the "free software" 4 freedoms definition too idealist? (lemmygrad.ml)

submitted 7 months ago by AlbigensianGhoul@lemmygrad.ml to c/leftistunix@lemmygrad.ml

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I've been struggling to come up with words to describe my frustrations with the definition of free software and how it ignores some of the nastiest behaviours of corporations.

Stuff like EEE, repositories that are technically free but owned by a corporation and too big to fork (chromium), and other hazier real life conditions. Could there be a "free software but dialectical" definition that would be more useful?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] ksynwa@lemmygrad.ml 9 points 7 months ago

GPL and similar licenses which enshrine these four freedoms are legally actionable. You could argue how actively a bourgeois law apparatus respects them is dubious. But I don't know what you mean by idealistic here. Are you saying that the four freedoms do not guarantee freedom in reality?

this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2023

19 points (95.2% liked)

Linux for Leftists

1079 readers

7 users here now

A Community for all leftists wanting to join and being part of a community that talks about Linux, Unix and the Free Software Community

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

AmeliaDaFloof@lemmygrad.ml

polskilumalo@lemmygrad.ml