>Today even projects which are explicitly developed by large coalitions are not using GPL. Think Android, LLVM, Tizen, etc. Old non-GPLed projects are raised to the forefront (think EFL) and large projects are relicensed (think AOO).
Those may be coalitions technically, but in every case there is a single mammoth player driving/steering/gatekeeping most of the work.
Android in particular is an interesting case as it's responsible for the vast majority of the anti-GPL push. Far more often than not the various device makers don't give anything back, layering their own crap on top of the core AOSP and keeping their changes private in an attempt to differentiate themselves, creating incompatibilites deeper into the system. We're *still* fighting binary-only driver (kernel and userspace) messes, and that doesn't even touch on the higher-level stuff.
If not for Google's continued patronage (and driver of most new development), Android would have completely fragmented by now in a mess that would have made the BSD wars look like a schoolyard spat. Google recognizes and embraces this, and is attempting to layer *another* set of (completely proprietary) APIs on top of "Open" Android.
I fear that the folks leading this mad rush towards Apache/BSD have forgotten the lessons learned from the BSD wars, and that we're heading towards another BSD bubble/cliff. When that (inevitably?) happens, the pendulum will swing back towards favoring Copyleft.
Why do I strongly come down on the side of copyleft? Because, simply, if you don't have source code (and the means to run/install/use it) then you don't have jack.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds