Has Google done either one of these to you while they fork your code to their servers and never give out said code?

So how does Google hosted services "pay forward" to their users the same way with the GPL code that they received? Yep, they don't.

So what are you exactly against? People using your code and improving it without giving anything back? Because that is what Google is doing. Why are you exactly against distributing modified code without source, but not against locking in that code in their own datacenters and never giving anything back? Because the end result is the same - they use the code without contributing back. In fact it's even worser, because it also locks users to their services.

I have a good example of this. I've been using Cryptoheaven as my email provider for several years. They open source their client, but not their server side code. This means you cannot actually use the code without also using them, and I've been locked to paying them because I was stupid enough to use their domains for emails while registering to all kinds of services.

They can't revoke old code, but they can change license terms later, even if others have submitted code patches or forked it with BSD license.

Yes, they adhere to GPL rules, but not the purpose of it (as judged of the many comments in this thread) in that if they use it to profit, they should give out the code to everywhere. They're basically getting around the GPL requirements because they only need to host the code on their servers.

It's a good analogy, because when you have true freedom of speech, you are actually allowed to say that there should not be freedom of speech. If you wouldn't be allowed to say that, then there would be no freedom of speech after all. That perfectly shows that freedom of speech doesn't limit what you can say based on what others think about it, while GPL does.

So what do you do when companies take your GPL code and only host it on their servers, like Facebook and Google along others? Since they're not distributing it, they're not violating GPL. But they're still profiting from your code without necessarily giving anything back. They don't have to, anyway.

Yes, only in the US penalties can be that insane. And it's not going to change when both sides demand millions in damages for such inane things. It only makes you just as bad as RIAA/MPAA. If you developed a GPL'd software and requested takedown of some company that abuses your rights, without fully knowing the laws and made some error during it, your life would not be ruined because you would now have to pay $1 million.

No, but humans would be able to verify details of the request, especially so that they aren't being done under fake names or contact info. Automatic email address that scans for youtube video urls and automatically takes them down is just made for abuse.

Just like Google does. And GPL doesn't prevent any of that, while it's essentially the same. Google also improves upon GPL'd software, but just because it's server side they don't need to give it away. You're working towards Google profiting while they have no need to give anything back. They aren't distributing the code, but end result is essentially the same.

Because if you truly want to promote freedom and free code, you also have to let people to profit from it. Freedom isn't picking who gets to enjoy that "freedom" based on some rules.

What would that even have to do with the issue at hand? I was just purely stating facts - when you search on Bing you get rewards which you can then use for charity. Fanboyism needs an opinion, that is just an easily verifiable fact.

GPL caused too many problems for companies and tried to enforce all software to be open source. GPL itself was very restrictive license, and it's great to see more open licenses like BSD and Apache gaining usage fast.

How is the parent offtopic? It's about charity and helping them. Their reward site is here and if you don't want to use the reward points yourself, you can give them to charity.

Well, Microsoft has other charity campaigns too. But Google doesn't let users donate just by searching, while Bing does.