Yeah egoism/illegalism is fun and all, but until you can get a significant mass to participate, you're actively harming those who may be sympathetic, yet don't want to violate their own country's laws. This harms the organizing you'd need to do in order to bring about meaningful change.

I am all about direct action, but you have to pick your battles. This one seems to me to be all downside with very, very little upside. Especially, as my sibling states, when you just say 'public domain' without mentioning your politics.

I must wonder just how large and self-evident must the mass or movement be before you'd deem it worth joining?

Have a little peek at how much public domain software is already being produced daily on GitHub:

https://github.com/search?q=%22public+domain%22&type=Code&s=...

Consider also that the majority of repositories on GitHub contain no license declaration at all, which should be a clear enough indicator of where these trends are going:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/18/github_licensing_stu...

Further, as explained in another comment, when even the most prominent and harshest former critics of public domain software (cf. Larry Rosen) have recently changed their mind and, if not exactly pushing the public domain as yet, at least see no problem with it, how much more could you want?

First of all, obviously, this is personal choice.

Secondly, a mass of people _creating_ public domain software isn't the issue: the mass would be of people _breaking the laws of the jurisdiction in which they live by using public domain software as public domain even though it's not recognized_.

Personally, I currently BSD/MIT all of my code, but am considering AGPLing it all from now on. I don't think that the negligible difference between BSD/MIT and public domain is worth _any_ headache at all; they're effectively the same from my viewpoint.

I'm not under any illusion that I am going to make any "meaningful change", and I'm not "organizing" anything. I'm a dude writing obscure software on the internet. Acts of principle, by definition, are ends in themselves, not pragmatic attempts to achieve some other goal. I lost this battle before I was even born.

If you write a blog post titled "Why your next project should be public domain" and submit it to one of the largest programming message board son the internet, you are attempting to organize some kind of political change, unintentional or not.

I don't care what you do. Writing obscure software is great! Have fun! Even put it in the public domain, you obviously know exactly what you're doing, and I think your principles are fine.

I don't think that advocating that others should follow along with what your doing is the most responsible of choices, especially if you don't care about achieving some sort of goal.

You can't imagine any other motivation for me submitting this beyond trying to organize political change? What about the personal satisfaction that comes from discussing a substantive issue with other intelligent people? These sorts of meta-discussions never go anywhere.

I think we have different definitions of 'political.' I would consider discussing a substantive issue with other intelligent people to be a political act.

Anyway, as I said elsewhere, rock on. I've already made my point.