this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2026
114 points (98.3% liked)
Linux
12907 readers
1149 users here now
A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)
Also, check out:
Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
New wave of OpenBSD users incoming. Good.
Non GPL software isn't an answer to freedom restrictions
The GPL restricts more freedom than the BSD licenses do.
For whom? It restricts the "freedom" of corporate and capitalistic leeches who don't contribute back to the commons
It forces everyone who wants to contribute anything to use the GPL as well.
The freedom to just take my free code, fork it into a closed product and become rich with it is important to me, because my goal is to write good software that is useful for as many people as possible. Why wouldn’t I want my good software to make people’s lives better just because the entity that sells it does not contribute anything back? Honestly, there is a lack of value for me.
It’s not like OpenBSD is exempt from the law. If they aren’t implementing some version of it, they are just hoping no one enforces anything.
Unlike Linux, OpenBSD is not under US jurisdiction.
Linux is not an operating system, it's just the kernel and has no concept of users/accounts or logging in to anything.
A great many Linux-based distros ("operating systems") are not under US jurisdiction.
Please do not start the "GNU/Linux" pedantry now.
Repackaging US software - and Linux-the-kernel and much of Linux-the-userland is, obviously, US software - in Europe does not suddenly make US jurisdiction go away.
Are you trolling?
Do you have any reasonable point that invalidates mine?
Do you see the difference of kernel maintainers in a particular jurisdiction being subject to their individual national law, however silly it may be, and the Linux kernel and derivates being licensed under GPL?
I see that the leaders of kernel development had to remove maintainers for legal reason, because Linux is legally U.S.-based, so U.S. sanctions matter.
Yes, anyone could just fork it. But right now, the only relevant version of Linux is the one that is an U.S. kernel. 🤷♂️
Linus is european.
Linus is a U.S. citizen.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Torvalds
And finland citizen, dual. So not under us jurisdiction when not in us.
Then why, you think, did he have to remove U.S.-sanctioned maintainers?
In https://lwn.net/Article/995186 they say because linux foundation is based in US. Why the fuck they do that? You right linux under us jurisdiction.
Told you so.
It’s still an operating system. Not implementing something is saying “this OS is not to be used in a country / state with age verification laws” Basically baring anyone in california or wherever implements these laws from using the OS in a legal way. I suspect most of these OS’s (even ones that are not “under US jurisdiction”) are going to eventually do something like when you install it asks where you are located and if its in a location where age verification is required it installs the age verification system.