@jeffcliff I suggest actually reading the GPLv3; https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html

>* GPL4 should make clear that source code should be provided in plaintext not PNG files/screenshots/photographs/xeroxes of source code/etc
`The “source code” for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. “Object code” means any non-source form of a work.` - a PNG wouldn't be the preferred form for making modifications to it - a UTF-8 file would be though.

>* GNU Affero should be opt-out not opt-in
Numerous people suggested making the Affero clause part of the GPLv3, but many companies didn't like that and claimed that they would fork GPLv2 versions rather than allow for freedom.

The current arrangement licenses is fine really, as you can just go with the AGPLv3-or-later and it's compatible with the GPLv3 - as both licenses are compatible with each other.

>* What happens if SJWs get in charge of the FSF? The GPL should be hardened against that possibility
`The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions of the GNU General Public License from time to time. Such new versions will be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to address new problems or concerns.`.
That would no longer be the FSF and it wouldn't be similar in spirit, the GPLv3 is already hardened against that.

>* I agree with eben moglen that we haven't fully thought out allowing GPL code to spy on users / allowing spyware -- an anti-spyware provision similar to the GPL3 'users must have the key' would make a lot of sense
Copyright does not cover spyware, thus a license can't do anything about it.

Every single time someone goes and adds spyware to free software, someone just goes and takes it out and releases a fixed version - so the spyware problem isn't an issue.

>* I agree with richard stallman (2001 nyu speech) that a future GPL (GPL4) could address the power differential between users of mobile systems in some way, that functionally gives more power to users
Adjustments to better suit mobile and IoStings devices may be suitable.

>* ...also there's something about movfuscation that needs to be addressed imho.
Obfuscated source code is not the preferred form of making modifications, so the GPLv3 doesn't allow that.

>* I think there's something inherently broken about forges that the GPL doesn't quite address. the github problem
Copyright does not apply to what websites people host software on, although more legal action against microsoft does need to be taken for all of the copyright infringement they are doing.

>* Freedom 0 requires the freedom to shield what program you are running from the government / authority. Without such basic privacy, you can't run the program as you wish. Merely running in the presence of state surveillance is not enough imho
The GPLv3 takes steps to ensure that you are not required to inform a particular party or the government that you are running the software; "You are not required to accept this License in order to receive or run a copy of the Program. Ancillary propagation of a covered work occurring solely as a consequence of using peer-to-peer transmission to receive a copy likewise does not require acceptance. However, nothing other than this License grants you permission to propagate or modify any covered work."