• whimsy@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          For whom? It restricts the “freedom” of corporate and capitalistic leeches who don’t contribute back to the commons

          • tux0r@snac.rosaelefanten.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 hours ago

            It forces everyone who wants to contribute anything to use the GPL as well.

            The freedom to just take my free code, fork it into a closed product and become rich with it is important to me, because my goal is to write good software that is useful for as many people as possible. Why wouldn’t I want my good software to make people’s lives better just because the entity that sells it does not contribute anything back? Honestly, there is a lack of value for me.

    • waitmarks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      It’s not like OpenBSD is exempt from the law. If they aren’t implementing some version of it, they are just hoping no one enforces anything.

        • refalo@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 days ago

          Linux is not an operating system, it’s just the kernel and has no concept of users/accounts or logging in to anything.

          A great many Linux-based distros (“operating systems”) are not under US jurisdiction.

          • tux0r@snac.rosaelefanten.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            2 days ago

            Linux is not an operating system

            Please do not start the “GNU/Linux” pedantry now.

            many Linux-based distros (“operating systems”) are not under US jurisdiction

            Repackaging US software - and Linux-the-kernel and much of Linux-the-userland is, obviously, US software - in Europe does not suddenly make US jurisdiction go away.

                • eleitl@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  12 hours ago

                  Do you see the difference of kernel maintainers in a particular jurisdiction being subject to their individual national law, however silly it may be, and the Linux kernel and derivates being licensed under GPL?

                  • tux0r@snac.rosaelefanten.org
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    9 hours ago

                    I see that the leaders of kernel development had to remove maintainers for legal reason, because Linux is legally U.S.-based, so U.S. sanctions matter.

                    Yes, anyone could just fork it. But right now, the only relevant version of Linux is the one that is an U.S. kernel. 🤷‍♂️

        • waitmarks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          It’s still an operating system. Not implementing something is saying “this OS is not to be used in a country / state with age verification laws” Basically baring anyone in california or wherever implements these laws from using the OS in a legal way. I suspect most of these OS’s (even ones that are not “under US jurisdiction”) are going to eventually do something like when you install it asks where you are located and if its in a location where age verification is required it installs the age verification system.