Ghostscript, a foundational open-source software created in 1986 by L. Peter Deutsch, became a critical tool for rendering PostScript and PDF documents across countless applications, from consumer printers to professional design workflows. Distributed under a dual-licensing model—GNU General Public License (GPL) for open-source use and a commercial license for proprietary integration—it balanced community access with sustainable development funding through Artifex Software. This equilibrium began to shift with the adoption of the AGPLv3 license, which extended copyleft provisions to software used over networks, effectively requiring companies offering document-processing services online to release their source code if they used AGPL-licensed components. As Artifex enforced these terms more rigorously around 2013, businesses relying on Ghostscript faced an existential dilemma: disclose proprietary code or pay licensing fees they hadn’t anticipated. This sparked widespread anxiety, particularly among startups and small developers, who viewed the enforcement as a betrayal of open-source principles despite Artifex’s legitimate need to fund ongoing development. In response, the ecosystem pivoted toward alternatives with more permissive licensing models. The most notable of these was MuPDF, ironically also developed by Artifex, which offered lightweight, high-performance PDF rendering under the traditional GPL, making it ideal for mobile and embedded applications without triggering AGPL’s network-use clause. Rather than a single dramatic fork, the outcome was a strategic divergence in usage: Ghostscript retained its dominance in high-fidelity, professional-grade document processing, while MuPDF gained traction in performance-sensitive and licensing-conscious environments. This episode underscored critical lessons about software dependency, license compliance, and the delicate balance between open collaboration and commercial viability. It highlighted how licensing decisions can ripple through entire industries, affecting everything from print shops to cloud-based document services. Today, both projects thrive, serving complementary roles and enriching the broader document-processing landscape. The conflict also spurred greater awareness of open-source licensing nuances, prompting developers and businesses to audit dependencies more carefully. Looking ahead, emerging technologies like AI-driven document analysis and cloud-native workflows will continue to test existing licensing frameworks, ensuring that the dialogue between innovation, freedom, and sustainability remains central to the evolution of open-source software. The story of Ghostscript and MuPDF exemplifies how technical infrastructure is never just about code—it’s shaped by legal frameworks, economic pressures, and human decisions, all of which quietly influence the digital experiences of billions.