> And, if it did, we’d have to have a serious conversation about the “or any later version” clause of the GPL and how it makes all software using it not open source.
I was referring to people's understanding of what open source stands for, not what it actually means.
However, I can say that I personally dislike the fact that GNU projects require copyright assignments too, and that they were able to relicense all their projects from "GPLv2 or later" to "GPLv3 or later" unilaterally. I'm more willing to give the FSF that blank check than commercial entities, though.
Also, the "or any later version" means the recipient (user) chooses, not any single controlling entity.
