*Well that maybe, but I had since that post and before your post clarified my stance, so it seems a bit disingenuous and pedantic to dig up the earlier statement.Edit: If you were not just asserting speculation that would read: "If Intel starts selling their Tizen-based ultrabooks, they would increase the Linux marketshare more than Ubuntu ever did."
This means that Canonical can use Mir in a closed source fashion, that ultimately is to the detriment of FOSS. I do not trust Canonical, so they don't get the benefit of the doubt from me.
The competitive landscape is skewed with Mir under the GPLv3 and CLA. Every project (outside of Canonical) using Mir, can only offer solutions licensed under the GPLv3. Which would be fine if the only option to use Mir was under the GPLv3. But it is not. Canonical has the option of selling license exceptions to handset makers.
Any Mir using project confined to the GPLv3 can't really make a stand towards hardware vendors, when these vendors demand licensing that lets them use Mir in a proprietary fashion. These vendors could just skip the completely FOSS project and get a closed source Mir via Canonical's CLA backdoor. This is undermining for free software.
If Canonical would come out and say, yes we could license proprietary, but it will be a cold day in hell before that happens, in a legally iron clad way, then I would have no objection to Mir GPLv3 + CLA. As of yet, Canonical didn't do that, so the playing field is isn't level.
Wayland may have a weak license, but it is completely the same for every last one of us on this planet. On top of that, the people involved with it have a good track record in the FOSS world, so I don't expect any shenanigans to come to the fore.
As an aside, even if Mir was GPLv3 only, this still doesn't change the fact that it is a technically redundant and fragmentary duplication of effort.