I reasoned this:
If I start teaching people about free software by first showing them GPL'd
software, they would ask what makes it 'free'. I would explain that the
software is licensed under the GNU General Public License, which gives all
users the four essential freedoms. They might research the GPL and find the
FSF.
This would be the quickest route to them discovering free software as defined
by the FSF. I was asking if when I started telling people, I showed them this
game and said, 'it respects your freedom', and they asked how, I would have
to explain free software in general. Then I would have to explain that this
game is not the best example of free software, and that the license isn't
perfect. I would have to then explain what the MIT license is, then compare
it with the FSF's GPL. All this is a longer route to explaining free
software.
So, I was basically asking if this route was 'route' was wrong, and that the
quickest route (showing and explaining a GPL'd program) was the only correct
one.
