I'm about to publish the source of the compiler of my new language and the standard library, both written in this language.
I need to choose the license. GPL is too restrictive (even with the linking exception) and complicated. MIT seems to not offer patent protection. So I'm now considering either Apache or MPL.
To me MPL looks like an ideal option: it protects the project and its contributors, and it doesn't result in any inconveniences for corporations.
The only thing they have to do is share modifications to existing MPL licensed files, but it's easier for them to contribute rather than maintain a separate fork anyway.
But several people are confident that if I don't go for a copyfree license, lots of developers and companies will be scared off from contributing.
I wasn't able to get any specific reasons from them other than ideological ones and "the license is too complicated".
What are the drawbacks I'm not seeing?
Forgot to mention that the compiler can only produces binaries. It emits either x64 machine code or C code which is later compiled by Clang or GCC. It can't be run as an interpreter.
edit 2 I went for MIT in the end.