Thanks for the comment. What excitement!

Here’s where I disagree with you: “One project after another is forced to adopt it . . .”

If they are “forced,” who is doing the forcing? I don’t think anyone is forced to use GPL code in their project. With a real virus, like the measles, you can do everything in your power to avoid getting it, and you still end up infected. With GPL code, someone has to decide to click “download.”

I agree that there is a huge benefit to building off GPL building blocks, and the person who doesn’t is in a tough situation relative to the competition. However, I don’t think that, “Give me your code for free with no restrictions because otherwise I’ll have to write it myself,” is a compelling argument.

Maybe a better term for the GPL would be “popular,” “attractive,” or even “enthralling” or “seductive.” But “viral” implies infection against the will of the victim, and that never happens.

Also, I would agree with your sort-of implied assertion that the GPL makes you less free, but only in comparison to, say, the BSD license. Within the GPL community, all are totally free– “free, beyond sharing” would be a good description.

You can live (or develop) in an entirely sanitary bubble, cut off from the rest of the community. And you will be an anachronism, probably years behind the current technology. Or you can join the community in which the virus is endemic, and be limited by its strictures.

And you thought the GPL made you free?