Exactly. The choice of GPL is an explicit choice to protect end user freedom over reducing intermediate developer & corporation hassle. If you want to ensure end-user freedom, BSD, MIT, Apache style permissive licenses don't cut it. If you want to become a developer celebrity and have your open source project used in projects everywhere, or if you are a company and you want to hook other devs on your freemium open core product, then those licenses are for you. The decision about whether to use the GPL or not is far more nuanced and there is no one-size-fits-all license out there. If there was I suspect we'd all use it...
Interestingly in this case, this ruling also reduces intermediate developer hassle for devs who are already used to working with GPL code. So that's a nice win (=
> protect end user freedom over reducing intermediate developer & corporation hassle
Actually it also reduces intermediate developer hassle: it's better if I don't have to rely on closed source firmware, firmware updaters, drivers, SDKs, proprietary tools.
Interestingly in this case, this ruling also reduces intermediate developer hassle for devs who are already used to working with GPL code. So that's a nice win (=