Vitalik Buterin Champions Copyleft Licenses to Safeguard Crypto’s Open Future

Ethereum's co-founder takes a stand against proprietary capture—just as Wall Street tries to patent decentralized finance.

Vitalik Buterin throws weight behind copyleft

The crypto pioneer argues restrictive licenses could strangle permissionless innovation. His solution? A viral open-source approach that keeps code free while preventing corporate enclosure.

Copyleft vs. crypto's existential threat

As institutional players flood the space, Buterin warns against letting TradFi remake decentralized tech in its closed-source image. The stakes? Nothing less than crypto's founding ethos of open access.

The irony isn't lost—while VC firms lobby for 'regulation,' their engineers quietly file blockchain patents. Maybe they're taking 'be your own bank' a bit too literally.

Crypto culture shift spurs legal reciprocity

Buterin railed against what he termed a mercenary trend in crypto. Projects that used to open-source their code voluntarily are now opting to be secretive. In such an environment, permissive licenses do not provide safeguards against privatization of publicly available tools.

He proposed that copyleft induces reciprocity. It mandates that a community-built code can only be accessed by those willing to share in the development. He pointed out that the method relies not on goodwill but on enforceable rules.

Buterin stated that copyleft would help maintain open collaboration without top-down intervention, avoiding the emergence of monopolies in a decentralized fashion. He further cautioned that focusing only on permissive models exposes the risk of letting the influential players squeeze value without compensation.

Economic power imbalances call for open-source safeguards

Buterin used economic theories to substantiate his claim. He cited the work of Glen Weyl, saying that such power concentration is the inevitable result of superlinear economies, where large actors create disproportionate returns. In these systems, the more capitalized or scaled firms are more likely to MOVE even further ahead.

He noted that governments across the globe have reacted by imposing the diffusion of technology. Among them are standardization requirements of the European Union, the transfer policies of China, and U.S. regulations of non-compete clauses. Buterin proposed copyleft licensing as a possible way to use a decentralized approach, allowing similar results but without being biased due to political or corporate interests.

“Copyleft creates a large pool of code that can only be accessed by those willing to share improvements,” he wrote.

Permissive licensing still has its place

Although he argued in favor of a wider change, Buterin conceded that permissive licenses can still be valuable in other scenarios. In the case of widespread use, limited restrictions can contribute to the fact that new technologies are disseminated more quickly. He also repeated his philosophical objections to intellectual property laws, but said the reality of protecting open-source communities has increased.

Adam Cochran, a crypto venture capitalist, concurred, adding that although copyleft is problematic in specific edge cases, the general ideology of copyleft can be found valuable in the contemporary context. Buterin stated that the use of copyleft used to be of little benefit, but now it is essential. 

Open source is no longer a radical vision but is in the middle of enterprise and blockchain creation. With more companies adopting open tools, stricter safeguards are required to ensure fairness and collective development. He encouraged programmers to consider the legislative foundations of their code.

Cryptopolitan Academy: Tired of market swings? Learn how DeFi can help you build steady passive income. Register Now