Good point. The Steem blockchain code license is not free/libre and the steemit.com code license is MIT and thus free/libre.
https://github.com/steemit/steem/blob/master/LICENSE.md
https://github.com/steemit/steemit.com/blob/master/doc/LICENSE.md
I completely understand why the blockchain license is not free and am generally in favor of it, but words should be chosen carefully so not to cause confusion.
Again without getting into the debate on whether being free open source software is a good or bad thing for the blockchain, the writer(s) of the roadmap (from which I quoted) saw a need to make the claim of free (freedom) software at least twice. Therefore it was seen as important and as such it is important that a claim seen as important not be a misleading one, which in this case, it is.
Agree that the steemit.com code is indeed legitimately free open source software.
Agree. The way they said it is a bit misleading.
However the code should remain licensed, if anyone can just fork the code, then people will just create a coin with a fair distribution, and developers will move to other chains instead of trying to solve the problems in this chain. Also investors have bought in with this license in mind to protect their investment.
I don't necessarily disagree with your argument. I disagree with it being falsely advertised as free software.
However, at a minimum I do believe that provisions should be made for: a) the stakeholders to be able to "fire" Steemit Inc. and hire a different developer or developers (I'm not suggesting this is realistic or desired now, instead I am considering the future); and b) the stakeholders to be able to continue to develop and maintain the software at all (including any necessary hard or soft forks) should Steemit Inc. cease doing so for whatever reason.
Failing to recognize that free software allows this and the current non-free license does not, and failing to remedy this flaw means that the value of the blockchain is impaired. Investors discount future possibilities and the possibility that Steemit Inc. as an entity could be someday be corrupted, coopted, or otherwise fail to act in the interests of the stakeholders, or that the code could be thrown in a sort of legal limbo as abandonware are perhaps-small but looming storm clouds with respect to the value of the token, and notably clouds that don't threaten other competing free-software blockchains.
Interesting I didn't think about this. What you say is that the license prevents even steem to fork if steemit inc disagree ? If this is the case then the license should definetely be removed at some points when steem has gained enough momentum/adoption.
It is somewhat ambiguous how it would apply in that situation, but at a minimum when it comes to being left in legal limbo that is not a good thing.