I don't think GPL software developers usually work for US software megacorps, and I haven't see people get up in arms about violations of non-copyleft licenses (how would you even violate those? Not crediting the original developer?). In fact, I've GPLed some of my own projects and pushback from people who seem to be associated with the Silicon Valley subculture is a pretty common occurrence (they typically want it to be relicensed under BSD or MIT or the like).
> I haven't see people get up in arms about violations of non-copyleft licenses
Oh? Then you didn't see me going off about the "Commons Clause" bullcrap.
For what it's worth, I'm a former member of the Board of Directors and V.P. Legal Affairs of the Apache Software Foundation, and I'm a music industry person who worked in a recording studio for 6 years before transitioning to tech.
It is philosophically consistent to defend attribution-based Open Source licenses and musicians' right to negotiate hard. In both cases, the rights of the creator are prioritized.
