> The concept of a corporation using your code for their profit without giving back is mostly just an imagination.
One of the authors of the Python requests HTTP library has called out Uber for using Python, and almost certainly using requests, and not paying any money
- did they modify it? - you can submit changes back only if you changed anything
- as it is server-side software, GPL had not changed much here, you have to provide the source of your program only to those who got delivery of that program, but that is not covering running on your servers.
- none of the licenses discussed require to donate money back, only source code changes.
So, yes, I think more companies should fund open source efforts when using open source software. The attention to OpenSSL and its security problems also showed how little funding that development got despite running most of the https on the internet. That indeed is scandalous. But this is covered by none of the current popular licenses.
> as it is server-side software, GPL had not changed much here, you have to provide the source of your program only to those who got delivery of that program, but that is not covering running on your servers.
This is exactly the reason the Affero GPL was invented.
And, yes, there is no legal requirement to donate money. However it shows bad faith and it shows that "a corporation using your code for their profit without giving back" is a reality.
One of the authors of the Python requests HTTP library has called out Uber for using Python, and almost certainly using requests, and not paying any money
https://lukasa.co.uk/2015/08/Funding_OSS/