Freedom of the code to its users vs Freedom of the users of the code

Freedom is not, and cannot be, an absolute. If I am 100% free, that by definition restricts the freedom of others (for instance, if I am free to punch you in the face, you are not free to not be punched in the face; if I am free to own you as a slave, you thus lose a lot of freedoms).

Determining what freedom should mean is not, and has never been, a simple matter of "well, if you make any restrictions on it, then it's not real freedom, so everyone just gets to be free!" It's all about finding balance, and dealing with nuance, and all that frustrating hard stuff.

Whose freedom a license guarantees is a fundamental difference, as the freedoms can be in conflict.

Which is a freer society: one that restricts late night partiers from playing loud music in residential areas, or the one that does not?