1 files changed, 123 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/blog/md/why-copyleft.md b/blog/md/why-copyleft.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..24cfe46
--- /dev/null
+++ b/blog/md/why-copyleft.md
@@ -0,0 +1,123 @@
+# Why do I use copyleft-licensed software?  | 27th March 2025
+
+*This blog post is an extract of a discussion where I explain why I use copyleft-licensed software.*
+
+In an email conversation, someone wrote to me:
+
+> I'd be interested to hear you explain why – I read your site and agreed
+> with much that was on this blog. I couldn't immediately understand the 'why',
+> perhaps I was looking in the wrong place.
+
+Maybe the 2 reasons I tend to use copyleft-licensed software could be: 
+
+First reason: 
+
+- when I use an application, I tend to think that I contribute to that application, and that if I become dependent on it, so I don't want it to be taking away from me.
+
+Second reason: 
+
+- I tend to think that copyleft-licenses are a mechanism against the asymmetry of power between controllers of software/applications and users.
+
+I'll elaborate on both points, and also mention some of the limitations.
+
+#### When you use an application, you contribute to the success of that application
+
+I think of my usage of a software as a contribution to that software or
+application - I think of usage as contribution because, say, Facebook
+would not exist without users.
+Users of Facebook make Facebook possible.
+No users, no Facebook.
+
+Then, I am thinking that if I contribute to something, and if I become dependent on this something for my everyday life, for my business for example, I want to have
+some agency over it.  
+
+I don't want this thing to be taken away from me; it's costly to build something, and then lose it.
+
+I always have this example in mind: a calendar application I used to use, Sunrise Calendar, that got acquired and then shut down.
+
+An example of a calendar application can sound trivial, but you can think of that would mean for a business.
+
+Sunrise became successful - because it had acquired half a million
+users, and then, because it was successful, it was acquired by
+Microsoft, and then shut down. 
+
+Users, who had made Sunrise successful, were left with no application. 
+
+This is an extract from the last blog post the team behind Sunrise published to users[1]:
+
+> One last note to let you know that we’re moving on for good to Outlook and
+> shutting down the Sunrise apps 
+>
+> [...]
+>
+> Tomorrow, you will be logged out of your account.
+>
+> [...]
+>
+> We’d like to extend a final and massive thank you to all of you who’ve
+> supported us along the way. It’s been a hell of a ride. We really hope you
+> enjoyed those years we spent together as much as we did. 
+>
+> With lots of love, 
+> 
+> The Sunrise team 
+
+You might think of other examples; in my case I also remember using Mailbox which was
+acquired by Dropbox and then shut down.
+Skype is another example some might remember.
+
+So now, if I start using a software or any digital tool, I am thinking:
+
+am I contributing to something which can be taken away from me? 
+
+Permissive licenses help but don't prevent the maintainer from turning a
+software proprietary, as far as I understand - so copyleft acts against this.
+The source code of a copyleft-licensed software will remain freely
+distributed.[2]
+
+*Copyleft isn't a panacea though.*
+
+Also, I am reluctant to use software that are copyleft-licensed, like Signal
+Messenger, yet are walled-gardens. 
+To me, lack of interoperability is an issue.
+I don't want to get trapped in a walled-garden, so I don't use Signal for that
+reason, even though it's copyleft, and end-to-end encrypted and collect very
+little metadata.[3]
+
+It's too much power in the hand of a few people, the CEO of Signal and a board probably.
+
+And that's also why I think copyleft helps: it's a mechanism against
+asymmetry of power between controllers of software and users.
+
+#### Copyleft: a mechanisms against asymmetry of power
+
+We, as users, adopt software and sometimes tend to become dependent on it, to
+run our business or keep in touch with our family for example  - maintainers of these software we are dependent upon
+then suddenly have a lot of power: they control a software which we can no longer
+exist without. 
+
+With proprietary software, users have little leverage to keep the hubris of providers in check; they can sell the software, get it shut down, and leave users with nothing; or they can govern what people can and cannot do *etc*. Zuckerberg and other CEOs of
+large technology providers have little counter-power against them; head of states
+meet them face-to-face - I am not saying it's bad or good, but they get
+stronger as users become dependent on their tools. 
+
+Relying on software whose source code is freely distributed, for me, as a user,
+is a way to know that there are some mechanisms in place to keep the hubris of
+maintainers (controllers of software) in check: if maintainers act in a way that displease users, then users can fork, and
+carry on using a software on their own terms. 
+Audacity, an audio editor, is an example. Maintainers joined a corporate (the corporate now maintains Audacity), users forked and created Tenacity.
+
+So, in a way, I think of freely
+distributed software as a mechanism to re-balance the asymmetry of power there
+is between users and controllers of software.
+
+[1] You can find this blog post in full on archive.org: https://web.archive.org/web/20170317060955if_/http://blog.sunrise.am/
+
+[2] Although there are examples of copyleft-licensed software that later
+became non-free. 
+There is a Wikipedia page about it which I can't find right now.
+How a company can switch from a copyleft-licensed software to proprietary is still unclear to me. 
+
+[3] MM and others will answer by saying that if Signal is built this way (as a walled-garden - my own words) that's for the security of users; that's another question we could discuss: "*What do we mean by security?*"  
+
+*Thanks to David, maintainer of blot.im, for asking me this question in the first place.*