I respect the developers and am a strong supporter of copyright - although along with the worlds libraries, not the changes that are trying to prevent people migrating to new formats as is necessitated by the fast moving IT world.
The beauty of tools like Joomla! and SMF is that they allow non-technical users to create vehicles for their material, disagreements over licenses are a little unnerving and a lot of people are reacting aggressively when what is need is constructive discussion. Understandable when they may have put in a lot of work and are suddenly faced with being forced to use alternatives. Perhaps the discussion would be better directed towards achieving a single form of OS license so that these sort of situations do not need to arise.
I wonder why such divisions occur, the Open Source Definition is relatively straightforward and the rational of point 5 includes "Therefore we forbid any open-source license from locking anybody out of the process."
My original html website took 5 years to build contains hundreds of researched articles and thousands of images and from the start I protected it with Copyleft in preference to Copyright. The reason being to ensure credit for the research went where it belonged and for integrity and traceability, but that others were allowed to disseminate the information. The result of this approach has been the community shared images, time and effort. There were dissenters who said that they could do it better, but they were still regular users of the shared knowledge - to de-emphasise my own role I described myself as a facilitator for the site, not the owner. Web 2 would not be easily reached without a tool like Joomla! and a solid reliable forum is needed now. The four Joomla! sites, I am facilitating are starting to exceed what was done on the first site in terms of collaborative input and I am now running 4 related sites.
It is important to me that I carry the principle of sharing into the knowledge content as the OS movement has done for software, I just hope that people do not start arguing about differences in detail of the principle of sharing. So far there are two camps, those who freely share and those who do not share because they want a 'perceived' commercial advantage. The latter group certainly study the knowledge provided. The community are very good at alerting the sites if they spot the knowledge being misused without credit and so far copyright has been all that has been needed to stop them.
So I do understand the needs of control but my feeling is that extent of that control that makes the difference. This seems to be the root of the problem here.
Anyway, interesting discussion, but I have three switches to unbridged SMF to get on with - so bye for now