Licensing

STEALTH COMMUNISM:
THE GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE (GNU GPL)
AND THE FUTURE OF FREE OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE (FOSS)

(c) www.imagtek.com
Free Use and Distribution in Unmodified Form
03 / 2025

DISCLAIMER: THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

For software developers considering LINUX desktop applications development, what
does the LINUX model of FOSS offer? The answer is short and brutal.

Nothing.

This is by design. LINUX is distributed under the ‘GNU General Public License’
(GNU GPL) aka ‘CopyLeft’. This license imposes upon Developers a system of
coercive Collectivism, hijack of Intellectual Private Property (IP), designation
of ‘enemies’, and solicitation of secret informants against ‘enemies’ by a
‘Compliance Organization’ for prosecution in the courts. This System has a
familiar history.

It is called Communism.

The GNU GPL attacks the foundations of FOSS by imposing Marxist ideology upon
software development. It toys with the word ‘freedom’, then systematically cancels
individual freedom via the ruse of ‘protecting the freedom of others’. Linux is
the only platform that sues developers for control of their IP, and this is
reflected in its laughable 3.82% share of the global operating-system marketplace.
The GNU GPL conforms to Marxist ideology in its pursuit of a Collectivist Utopia
at the cost of denying individual freedom, and in its resort to coercion to
enforce ideological compliance. That is Pure, by-the-book, Communism.

As may be expected, the true nature of the GNU GPL is obfuscated in vague and
deceptive legal jargon. Deep within the massive text of this rambling,
sermonizing, Manifesto-License, lies the crux of the issue.

‘ To “modify” a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the
work in a fashion requiring Copyright permission, other than the
making of an exact copy. The resulting work is called a “modified
version” of the earlier work or a work “based on” the earlier work.

A “covered work” means either the unmodified Program or a work based
on the Program. ‘

–GNU General Public License Version 3, 29 June 2007 ‘

The above is a cunning legal over-reach into Magical Thinking. The GNU GPL asserts
the protections of Copyright Law, then claims the same Law voids License and
Copyright of all IP that it touches. It does this via a stealth re-definition of
the word ‘modify’. If your FOSS application contains a single component licensed
under the GNU GPL, the license claims control over your entire application. All of
your work becomes a ‘modified version’ or is ‘based on’ the GNU GPL component
because, …wait for it… that is what ‘The resulting work is called…’.
SHAZAM!!!
By re-defining a single word, Copyright protection of your application magically
disappears; hijacked as ‘covered work’ of the GNU GPL. But this magical claim is
baseless. The GNU GPL presents no legal argument, mandate, or precedent for its
claimed privilege to void lawful License and Copyright by mere association. This
is because it has none. It has simply altered the definition of a common word.
The GNU GPL is a delusional Marxist fraud that violates multiple established
Principles of Law. From a Systems Engineering perspective the license is a viral,
network crawling klepto-algorithm.

The legal Foundation of the GNU GPL is a surreal theory that its Magical Thinking
represents a brilliant ‘hack’ of Copyright Law that grants unique, undisputed
privilege to void existing License and force open distribution of Copyright
protected IP. This theory is legally baseless. The sole supporting argument is
that altering the meaning of a word alters Law that uses the word. This argument
is also legally baseless. Long established Contract and Copyright Law legislated
by elected Governments is not canceled by re-defining the language that the Law
is written in. It is a leap of irony for the ‘Free Software Foundation’ (FSF) to
brand its Marxist cancellation of human freedom as ‘Software’ freedom.

FOSS is by definition ‘Freely Distributed’. FOSS works are released to the Public
with no constraints upon access and use. In contrast, the GNU GPL dictates
voluminous coercive liabilities that allegedly supercede lawful License and
Copyright of proprietary IP. But there is a Catch-22; by dictating coercive
liabilities GNU GPL works forfeit status of a lawful ‘Free Distribution’. Under
Statuatory Law, coercive liabilities may only be imposed via explicit contractual
agreement signed by named, informed, and consenting counter-partys. There is no
such thing as a ‘Freely Distributed’ legally binding Contract. If there is, then
the GNU GPL erases the entire edifice of Intellectual Property Law via edict. The
Manifesto aspect of the GNU GPL explicitly advocates this interpretation.

It gets worse. The GNU GPL is Recursive; meaning it claims Collective control of
any computer app contaminated by a FOSS component tracable through a network of
‘association’ to an app containing a GNU GPL component. This viral dynamic creates
unbounded webs of liability where all FOSS components of a GNU GPL contaminated
app become vectors of the viral GNU GPL contagion spreading throughout the FOSS
Community. This is no joke. It places all FOSS developers under threat of a
Lawsuit by subsidized Communist fanatics of the ‘Software Freedom Conservancy’
(SFC); the ‘Compliance Organization’ for the FSF. The mission of the SFC is to sue
for release of proprietary IP anyone suspected of GNU GPL contagion.

And it gets even worse. FOSS developers are now threatened if any part of their
application is ‘similar’ to a GNU GPL work. Commonly used algorithms have similar
expressions in source code that FSF / SFC exploit as a pretext for IP Fraud. This
fanaticism is on display in the SFC ‘CCFinderX Clone Detector’ that flags a ‘GNU
GPL Violation’ at a 3.68% ‘Similarity Ratio’; as computed by ‘peer reviewed
algorithms’. This is no joke. (Link: sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/
vmware-code-similarity.html) Proving yourself innocent is impossible because it is
argued that if a single component of your work is ‘similar’ to a GNU GPL component
then it is by definition a ‘clone’ and you forfeit control of your application.

The FSF calls this legal Frankenstein ‘CopyLeft’, yet there is NO discernable
difference between the GNU GPL and Communism. None. Re-branding Communism makes it
no less Communist than re-branding a duck makes it less a duck. Avoiding GNU GPL
Lawsuits via the massive text of legalese drivel specifying ‘CopyLeft Compliance’
(Link: copyleft.org/guide) is a full time job for a legal professional. Thus, the
fanatics of the FSF / SFC see no irony in running a jobs program for Lawyers suing
Developers. Inspired by some sort of fever dream, the official FSF / SFC ‘CopyLeft
Compliance Guide’ dictates a dedicated ‘GNU GPL Compliance Officer’ on every FOSS
‘Programming Team’ to enforce ‘Compliance Training and Oversight’. FOSS coders
are ‘required’ to research every FOSS module for GNU GPL contagion using ‘peer
reviewed Code Compliance Scanners’ for the ‘Code Audit’ of a ‘GNU GPL compliance
report’. The Fools spewing this totalitarian bullshit can all go pound sand.

FSF / SFC websites broadcast demented propaganda casting non-GNU GPL developers as
thugs (Links: sfconservancy.org, defectivebydesign.org). Yet we are assured of FSF
/ SFC benevolence toward the ‘Community’; conditional upon you being ‘reasonable’
and ‘doing the right thing’ to avoid ‘painful consequences’. This standard
Communist ultimatum has not varied in over a century; and things always get ugly
for those who do not ‘respond positively’ to ultimatums. The latest ultimatum from
the SFC is that FOSS Developers are ignoring their ‘obligation’ to implement SFC
‘CopyLeft Compliance’. These dictate surrender of all Copyright protected
Application IP including source code, revision control, build scripts, run-time
libraries and dependencies, user guides, and instruction manuals detailing
procedures to re-create complex applications. This IP must be surrendered on
Demand with unlimited re-distribution rights. Or face a Lawsuit by Communist
fanatics demanding such an IP release, plus fees to pay their lawyers.

But…

The GNU GPL has no standing under Statuatory Law, nor in its attempt to falsely
equate ‘CopyLeft’ with the much broader FOSS movement based upon non-restrictive /
non-Communist licensing. The GNU GPL relies upon the threat of hugely expensive
litigation (Lawfare) rather than viable legal argument to impose Communism upon
FOSS Developers. Litigation was avoidable in the past by shunning GNU GPL code.
Unfortunately, escalation and over-reach of GNU GPL fraud via the SFC ‘CCFinderX
Clone Detector’ swindle, now threatens all FOSS.

By Law, developers retain Copyright to their Freely Distributed Works. They may
solicit Improvement of their works by others; retain Copyright to such Improved
Works; and require a notice advising presence of their work in a larger work. But
that is the FULL EXTENT of Developer Rights for ‘Freely Distributed Works’ under
Copyright Law; GNU GPL fraud notwithstanding. There are NO Statuatory grounds for
Damages, nor Claims against IP that hosts a ‘Freely Distributed’ work. Such
liabilities disqualify a work as a ‘Free Distribution’ and require an explicit
Contractual Agreement signed by all parties as prerequisite to licensing, and
compliance litigation. Software that imposes coercive liabilities upon developers
is not FOSS. It is Fraud with exposure to tort liability to state that it is.

It is time for LINUX to deprecate the GNU GPL.

The FSF / SFC dogma that all FOSS applications that do not conform to Marxist
ideology must be litigated out of existence, is legally Void. GNU GPL developers
who feel ‘harmed’ by non-Marxists using their ‘freely distributed’ work should
refrain from freely distributing their work. Developers are free to donate their
time and license their works as they like, but absent a signed contract between a
source code Copyright holder invoking the GNU GPL and a named user, the license is
unenforcable. LINUX is not a Communist Gulag and magical-thinking that re-brands
submission to Communism as ‘Software’ Freedom, does not cancel Copyright Law.

THE GNU GPL VIOLATES BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS

People have a basic human right to earn a livelihood from their honest labor.
The GNU GPL takes away this right.

People have a basic human right to practice individual Free Enterprise under
statuatory Law. The GNU GPL takes away this right.

People have a basic human right to undisputed legal control of original IP they
create. The GNU GPL takes away this right.

People have a basic human right to integrate FOSS components into applications
without assuming stealth, coercive liability. The GNU GPL takes away this right.

People have a basic human right to distribute IP under legal Copyright and License
that cannot be hijacked by Marxist Fraud. The GNU GPL takes away this right.

The GNU GPL is no joke. It is a noxious Fraud that has marginalized a superior
computer operating system. It seeks to debase our legal system with its claim of
a Utopian ‘Software’ freedom that supersedes Human freedom. It imposes upon
Software Developers the historical pattern of Communism in its resort to coercion,
utopian magical thinking, authoritarianism, and disregard for human rights.

The GNU GPL has nothing to do with human Freedom or the ‘Right to Repair’. It
seeks to circumvent Labor, Copyright and Patent Law, and to entrap legally naive
Developers as dupes in a viral IP fraud network pursuing a Communist agenda. Its
propaganda depicting non-GNU GPL developers as thugs, is demented and polarizing.
Despite threats of techno-Bolsheviks, unrestricted FOSS Development is proceeding
briskly on its own economic merits. LINUX stands on the wrong side of Human
Freedom with its ‘Software’ freedom fraud. LINUX’ pitiful sliver of the computer
software marketplace, in spite of its power, stability, and economy, is an
indictment of the GNU GPL and failed ideology of Communism. LINUX is a premier
computer operating system due to the brilliance of its coders, but is crippled as
an Applications platform by fanatical, Marxist ideology. LINUX does not need
coercive, Marxist licensing. The FOSS movement does not need it.

No one needs the GNU GPL.

Intellectual Slavery is Not Freedom.

References:

gnu.org/licenses/gpl.txt

copyleft.org/guide

fsf.org

defectivebydesign.org ***Note: gruesome ‘devouring Ork’ video removed…(06/23)

sfconservancy.org

sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/

sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/vmware-code-similarity.html

Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels (2004) [1848]. ‘Manifesto of the Communist Party’