"Bookwyrm itself is non-free software"

LemonCake: > While it’s an atypical license, it does seem a bit excessive to call it ‘proprietary software’. Does anyone know more about the reasoning behind the anti-feature description or if it would be appropriate to remove it? I’m not a lawyer, but if a license discriminates some kinds of users, it’s non-free. Everything that’s not free is proprietary. Quite ironic that an “anti-capitalist” license actually reinforces capitalist monopolies making “non-eligible” people use proprietary alternatives.