Why I (A/G)PL

That's a pretty old article, when Lamson hit 1.0, Zed wrote: "Someone suggested that I post a blog post announcing the release of Lamson 1.0. You can go grab the latest using your favorite method, and then I also gave everyone a present by releasing Lamson BSD or GPL licensed. This means you can use it for either type of project."

I think he still believes that in principle (A/G)PL is for the best, but I think he also wants the code he's written to get to as many people as it can. Likewise, he is a self-professed git hater, but he still put some of his projects on Github in the interest of the community that has grown around his projects.

I know lots of people have a hate on for him, but I actually kinda admire the guy.

> the unwritten contract: If I give, you give.

I can understand what he means but this is his basic misunderstanding. The "unwritten contract" doesn't exist. As Open Source developer you give although the vast majority of your users don't. Anyway, "It’s The Author’s Right" to choose a license.

Of course those making money could/should pay, but for startup folks this money upfront is a deal breaker, no?