> The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1).
>>I actually can't do that with GPL code - not because my employer tells me
>>not to but because I know that could get my employer into trouble.
This is extremely loose and deceptive talk. That freedom is genuine and valuable. You are talking about something completely different, that has no bearing whatever on freedom 1.
The company I work for modifies and revises GPL'd code all the time. It causes us no problems whatsoever, because we don't release or distribute it. Instead we just use it internally for our own purposes. Nothing in the GPL restricts your use, abuse or modification of the code. It only restricts how you can go about sharing and distributing it.
> It only restricts how you can go about sharing and distributing it.
Let me clarify this: the GPL allows you to redistribute your modified version. It only mandates you give your users the same rights you were given, so that they too can study and modify and share their work.
You get to stand on the shoulders of giants (for free!), but you have no right to prevent others from doing the same.
"but you have no right to prevent others from doing the same"
That's not quite right. It's not you have no right to prevent others from doing the same. Neither GPL nor MIT let you stop other people from standing on the same shoulders you stood on. The difference is whether you must let people stand on your shoulders. GPL forces you to open your shoulders. MIT lets you choose to share your shoulders or not.
If you use a GPL ladder to get up, you are mandated to leave it in place so that others can do the same. With a MIT ladder you are free to pull it up behind you.
Now the latter may be more free in the absolutist sense, but it is a very antisocial kind of free. But then the corporate world has proven again and again that it will be very antisocial if it gets them a pound of flesh...
If you use a GPL ladder to get up and then climb even higher then you are mandated to not just leave the ladder but to extend as you continue to climb.
If you use an MIT ladder to get up then climb even higher then you have the choice to extend the ladder as you go or not. Or partially extend it in some places but not all. But there is literally nothing you can do to the original ladder. It's there for anyone else to use exactly as you used it and there's nothing you can do to stop them.
Fair point. You get the right to stand on the shoulders of giants, but you have no right to prevent others from standing on your shoulders as long as you are on the shoulders of giants.
Your use of "rights" is a little unclear. We all stand on the shoulders of giants in all things. Yet I most certainly have the right to prevent people from standing on my shoulders. I write proprietary code for video game entertainment so I regularly take advantage of that right.
The GPL license has the right to limit what freedoms I have as a developer if I choose to use code it covers. It limits the freedom of some people (developers) to protect the freedom of other people (consumers). I similarly have the right to choose a different license that prioritizes my freedoms of a developer over the freedoms of consumers.
And all of these things are possible due to the restriction of freedom over all of us as governed by copyright law.
You only have the right to prevent people from standing on your shoulders as long as the giants you are standing upon did not dictate the terms under which you get to enjoy the view. If they say that being generous is a condition to stand on their shoulders, those are the conditions.
The GPL limits your freedom of limiting the freedoms of others given by those who wrote the software your software depends upon. If you want to limit the freedoms of your users, you don't have the right to use software explicitly licensed to preserve those rights to limit them. If you want to do that, you either use software that was not made to preserve user freedoms, such as software licensed under BSD, Apache, or you write your own.
> And all of these things are possible due to the restriction of freedom over all of us as governed by copyright law.
>>I actually can't do that with GPL code - not because my employer tells me >>not to but because I know that could get my employer into trouble.
This is extremely loose and deceptive talk. That freedom is genuine and valuable. You are talking about something completely different, that has no bearing whatever on freedom 1.
The company I work for modifies and revises GPL'd code all the time. It causes us no problems whatsoever, because we don't release or distribute it. Instead we just use it internally for our own purposes. Nothing in the GPL restricts your use, abuse or modification of the code. It only restricts how you can go about sharing and distributing it.