The GPL exists because Stallman knew that corporations seldom do the right thing if not required so by law.

And like the DRM he detests so much, he hurts the "good guys" more than the "bad guys".

Plenty of companies simply avoid the gpl because it complicates things, and stick to more permissive licenses for their open source efforts.

Plenty more just do what the fuck they want regardless of what the gpl says.

And yet there are many thriving GPL projects, running on billions of devices worldwide, from routers to servers. GPL has created an environment where Netgear and Linksys collaborate on developing the same pieces of software, not due to morals, but due to it being the best option for themselves. Same with IBM and many other companies working on GPL sofware.

> not due to morals, but due to it being the best option for themselves

Indeed, and this is why the same thing happens in the BSD world. There are many examples of large and small companies, competitors, working on the same parts of FreeBSD.

Enlightened companies contribute to Free and Open Source software because it's in their best interest, not directly because of the license. Conversely, there are countless examples of companies who don't think it's in their interest, and willfully violate the GPL.

I think the contributions under discussion here are monetary, not code, so the GPL doesn't have much to do with this. pfSense is open source, so the code is available.

Personally I find antagonizing non-contributing users more morally objectionable than the non-contribution.

Of course I'm speaking generally, I don't know the backstory here so there might be some other things causing the bad blood. But I would prefer we as a community would not attack people/companies just for not contributing.

pfsense has a long history of antagonizing their openbsd/freebsd upstreams.

I don't think there is any support for me being antagonistic toward FreeBSD.

I've addressed openbsd elsewhere in this stream.