Opensource

Cooperation and sharing performs significantly better for collective gains. This applies to all kinds of concepts. Science, public infrastructure, common goods, common resources, governance, trade agreements, EU, medicine, software…

Where it becomes problematic is when parties reap gains without participating. Using science to develop products and gain further knowledge without sharing them, using public infrastructure without paying taxes, using common infrastructure and frameworks without committing to them, nationalism, monopolies on medicine, proprietary software and platforms that are not cooperative…

Much of our transformation and development speed and gains in the last century has been in a framework of cooperation. In the current global politics, we can see and imagine what rejecting cooperation could lead to and where it could lead us to.

FOSS is great for the same reasons as other forms of cooperation: Collective gains.

Unfortunately, we have not solved the issue of beneficiaries that don't actively participate and contribute yet.

In patent law, you publish your findings and get a timespan of authoritative use and control but at the same time commit to it being publicly accessible and at some point usable. Some software licenses attempt to do the same.

In music licensing, there's frameworks for collective licensing.

Some frameworks use centralized/government regulation and prosecution to ensure play-fair systems. (To varying degrees and success, obviously.)

I get where you're coming from, but I disagree [with disliking the software freedom]. The upsides and collective gains of software freedom are undeniable. Where we need to do and establish more, and some things are happening in some places, is to ensure a positive collaborative environment overall.