The only groups that wish to "escape the network effects of the GPL" are proprietary companies that wish to attack their own users' freedoms. The fact that you have a choice of being able to reject proprietary software is not the issue at hand, because people always have that choice, and it is good that we do. The issue is why you should make the choice and what ramifications it has.
>shared ownership of the means of production
I mentioned this in a different thread but this has no context in the current discussion, the "means of production" are a complete non-sequitur in relation to software. Free software isn't "communist," it simply rejects authoritarianism.
Actually, as an liberally licensed open-source author, I wish to "escape the network effects of the GPL" because I want proprietary companies to use my software, too.
That means I have to escape the GPL despite your wanting to force me to participate. You can keep claiming this isn't communism, except that it exactly parallels the Marxist notions of shared ownership.
>shared ownership of the means of production
I mentioned this in a different thread but this has no context in the current discussion, the "means of production" are a complete non-sequitur in relation to software. Free software isn't "communist," it simply rejects authoritarianism.