I wasn’t familiar with the author before this article. You can see his wikipedia page here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_M._Kühn
He is best known for his efforts in GPL enforcement,[7] as the creator of FSF’s license list, and as original author of the Affero General Public License. He has long been a proponent for non-profit structures for FLOSS development, and leads efforts in this direction through the Software Freedom Conservancy. He is a recipient of the 2012 O’Reilly Open Source Award.
Excerpt from the first part of the piece:
In this philosophical essay, I explore the question: “When (if at all) is it ethically and morally acceptable to use proprietary software in the production and/or improvement of urgently needed copylefted FOSS?”
The question presents a complex conundrum. I attempt herein to rigoriously examine it through both a priori ethical analysis and a posteriori (and folksy) consideration of my personal experience and the shared experiences of the early software freedom movement.
I surprised myself at the outcome of my analysis. I conclude that under some circumstances (of which we have already witnessed in key historical examples), use of proprietary software by FOSS contributors to create/improve FOSS becomes a moral imperative. And, that imperitive often supersedes the moral imperative to avoid using that proprietary software.
IMO using free software isn’t morally superior to using proprietary software.
The answer is and should always be “never” if the possibility of using FOSS is available either currently or by hard work to bring it into existence - however, there are cases where some software is not available in any other capacity and offers a service that is otherwise locked down. So we deal with the necessary evils where we must until we no longer have to.




