one of the frequent justifications for GPL-style licenses over MIT-style ones is that they prevent some type of, as far as I can tell, "enclosure"
GPL proponents describe a scenario in which a non-GPL-licensed project can be "taken" by a commercial organisation and made proprietary
I do not understand how this can happen, or how the GPL prevents it
copyleft Afficher plus
@Angle I guess I'm not super clear on a) why this is a problem (and who it's a problem for), and b) how it practically differs from using entire GPL software products as part of a stack that includes proprietary software
like, why is the process boundary so important