This was discussed a lot in the aftermath of the FSF issues. I think for community projects designating an alternative non profit might be the right way.
I've been thinking about this issue as well and I like this idea a lot. The worry that a future GPL might be watered down or contain terms that the original authors of the code dislike is real. Especially in light of the bullying and harassment campaigns against Richard Stallman that have happened in the past, the idea that the FSF could be subverted by less principled and forward-thinking people is not far-fetched.
singpolyma | 7 hours ago
This was discussed a lot in the aftermath of the FSF issues. I think for community projects designating an alternative non profit might be the right way.
BenjaminRi | 8 hours ago
I've been thinking about this issue as well and I like this idea a lot. The worry that a future GPL might be watered down or contain terms that the original authors of the code dislike is real. Especially in light of the bullying and harassment campaigns against Richard Stallman that have happened in the past, the idea that the FSF could be subverted by less principled and forward-thinking people is not far-fetched.
polywolf | 2 hours ago
yes absolutely
i mean understandable frankly, i wouldn't want Richard "political discourse on sex" Stallman to be running a prestigious organization (still!)
gerikson | an hour ago
Considering that many people are declaring the functional end of GPL-licensed software in the comments here: https://lobste.rs/s/jr3zym/relicensing_with_ai_assisted_rewrite - I think the FSF have bigger fish to fry than their leader's unpopularity.