[Battlemesh] Short update on COSLi

[guifipedro]

> > - "They" are taking benefit of what we do, but if we license is free
> > as in freedom, we can enjoy what they did (example: Linux kernel -
> > GPL).
>
> The Linux kernel has a ***modified*** GPLv2, where binary blobs are
> allowed for drivers.

Are you sure is a modified version of GPLv2? I think that nobody tried
to do anything about that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_blob#Legality

For example Free Software Foundation do licenses, but enforce it in a
social engineering way "you cannot do that / i'm not happy with". It
was thanks to gpl-violations.org [1] that the door was opened for
openwrt [2], because they reported to courts.

Linux kernel is not probably representing freedom, but at least,
represent a very diverse ecosystem of people and organizations with
very different scope; and they are cooperating. That's how I
understand it works the nature, the universe (sharing in some way the
resources).

So the problem I see with licenses, terms of use and so on (in
general) is that certain uses can be denied. I think this is the worst
part of digital technology. In a very silly example it's like a hammer
that only respond to certain operations. Because this is what is a
good technology, no? To be simple and easy to use, as a hammer, knife,
rope. And from there creativity begins to do bad and good things. But
who are we to enforce on that?

I don't have a/the solution. Just discussing. And worried about that.
It's a good hack that we got: everything should have a prize, a
license, a terms of use, etc. Well, at least, it's very clear to me
that a weak license like MIT and Apache, can be privatized at certain
time; and this is even worst. That's why copyleft is something
everyone can accept: it is for all, for nobody, a commons.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gpl-violations.org

[2] http://ebb.org/bkuhn/talks/OpenWRT-2016/gpl.html