(context post by bytemaster)

Of course those anarcho-capitalits among us who do not recognize “copyright” as natural because it is an attempt to limit what someone else can do with their knowledge and information is not “scarce” as each new copy does not diminish the original owners property. So you cannot copyright code any more than music or anything else. Once you share an idea with someone else it is in their head and there is no taking it back nor telling them what they can do. Copyright does not exist without the state and is ARBITRARY in its duration.

Conclusion, copyright and licenses only matter to statists. It is a “monopoly” that is maintained by force vs free competition.

If you want a “competitive advantage” never release the code. If you release the code, you have no right to use force to prevent others from using, distributing, or creating derivative works from it.

Ehh… Macho, bitcoin IS open source. MIT license IS a open source license. No closed source, proprietary software or DRM here.

If the only library is closed source, then there’s a project to make an open source one.

If the only library is GPL, then there’s a project to make a non-GPL one.

If the best library is MIT, Boost, new-BSD or public domain, then we can stop re-writing it.

I don’t question that GPL is a good license for operating systems, especially since non-GPL code is allowed to interface with the OS.  For smaller projects, I think the fear of a closed-source takeover is overdone.