By “today” I dont mean “post-ai” I mean “pre-revolution”

I don’t disagree - I’m not saying permissive licenses are necessarily the right call today :)

I agree somewhat with the sentiment of the first half of your reply. Though I don’t think that contradicts what I said. A permissive license may not be the best decision right now because you’re exceedingly likely to be taken advantage of, especially as LLM scrapers trawl the web for any scrap of code they possibly can. But I still think it is what we should be striving toward, revolution included.

As for the latter half, hmm no I think I can blame them for it actually. Obviously the system (see: capitalism) is the root cause but we don’t need to pretend that bad actors don’t carry any blame for their actions.

Those legal mechanisms do exist in theory! But, as ever, if its you vs Microsoft, you can probably get fucked :(

I misunderstood your initial point, I thought you were speaking against permissive/copyleft licenses generally. We agree with one another. Except in the “I can be sure that the technology and code will be freely shared” because just as bad actors can abuse a permissive license, bad actors (see: companies with enough money to just squash the legal case) can simply ignore a copyleft license. I think we 99% agree though and I love copyleft.

Permissive licenses are what everyone should strive toward. A world where we can share advancements and technologies freely with one another and innovate based on the prior work of others is a world where a shit load of cool stuff gets done. The issue arises when bad faith actors take advantage of it and act against the spirit of collaboration. The problem isn’t caused by the permissive license, but by the bad actor, and the latter is what should be addressed