I know it's been discussed on OB's GitHub issue tracker, just wish I got
to know of it before it happened.

This isn't to rail on OB's team, you're all doing cool stuff that I'll
be using for sure. It does open the door for unscrupulous behaviour (as
described below), which the AGPL was designed to prohibit.

Yes, the *GPL family is prohibitive - it's a hack in lawspace.

Sorry again if I sound hoarse.

* Originally posted to Reddit:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2fqnxw/openbazaar_has_officially_moved_to_mit_licensing/ckdyobi

Yup. "Freedom of the protocol" and network integration has little to do
with how this particular piece of software is licensed. There is no need
for a "license to communicate" at this level of network abstraction.
What it does (and AGPL doesn't) is allows running separate networks,
where users don't get the same rights.

What we can* do now is create an eBay-style service running nodes for
other people, taking fees, providing notary/arbitration services, and
snooping on them in the meanwhile, all legally.

Or, perhaps, something less sinister. We can* now build a "derivative"
for Windows with a trojan, and distribute it without the source.
Seeing how there is no Windows build yet, such work could constitute
considerable improvement, which we could rebrand and relicense. I'm sure
people would use it. Next step: same for Android.

Freedom is great when everyone has it. But freedom is even better when
you can have slaves.

*: As soon as _everyone_ who wrote a line in DarkMarket signs a formal
document to relicense the software (on which OpenBazaar is based).