There is an ongoing debate about which category of licence offers the greatest degree of freedom. This debate focuses on complex issues such as the definition of freedom and its freedoms are more important: the potential future recipients of a work (freedom to create proprietary software) or only the initial recipient (freedom to create proprietary software). However, the current availability of both types of licenses, Copyleft and Permissive, allows authors to choose the type that best fits their work. That is an excellent point; All the water flows towards the sea. In this example, I use “downstream” to refer to the immediate downstream, not the possible downstream. Perhaps a better formulation would be to say that a Copyleft license retains freedom to the end user, while a generous license retains freedom to the next downstream developer. The most well-known free software license, with a powerful copyleft, is the GNU General Public License. A stronger copyleft license is the AGPL, which requires the release of source code for Software as a Service application cases (“see also” the sometimes used term “Service as a Software Substitute [SaaSS]], for example.B. when the software is provided on servers.  The Sybase Open Watcom Public License is one of the most powerful Copyleft licenses, as it fills the gap in the GPL for “private use” and requires the release of source code in each application case.  One last outstanding strong copyleft license is the Design Science License, as it can be applied to any work, not only software or documentation, but also literature, artwork, music, photography, and video.
The Design Science License was created by Michael Stutz after becoming interested in the application of GNU-type Copyleft on non-software works that were later called “Open Content”. In the 1990s, DSL was used on music recordings, visual arts and even novels. It is now hosted on the License List of the Free Software Foundation site, but it is not considered by the Free Software Foundation to be compatible with the GPL. Copyleft licenses necessarily use relevant creative rules and laws to enforce their rules. For example, those who contribute to a work under Copyleft typically need to acquire, postpone, or assign copyright ownership status.. . . .