The OSI was created by the hyperscalers to pilfer free work from the commons.
Redis and elastic got owned by GCP and AWS because they went for OSI purity. The OSI is the hyperscalers.
Good fair source is more like shareware. The community can do whatever they want. Companies trying to profit must give back or pay to play.
Developers need to be compensated. It shouldn't be a labor of love that gets commercialized by hyperscalers whose own products are not open source.
The Corridor Crew model here is fantastic. As are fair source licenses. That's the way we should have done things all along.
[–] ben-schaaf 3 days ago
[–] LeoWattenberg 3 days ago
Audacity, Libreoffice etc. are regularly sold by companies in box stores and there isn't much of a problem with that. What's being sold there is really just a means of access, just like some pay an internet subscription, some pay for CD-ROMs or, heaven forbid, floppy disks.
But let's say that we don't care about the 4 freedoms, let's say the purpose is for developers to get compensated. In that case, this still is a bad license, as CC-by-nc-sa with redundant and contradictory terms isn't particularly clear. the way I'd interpret the license text differs from the intention stated in the README, "You may not repackage, redistribute...this tool" doesn't leave room for any shareware/donationware to get created in the first place.
I would have much preferred for them to be less sloppy about their licensing. The only way I can understand the current license is to ignore it, and go with the vague intention of "we want big companies to pay, and be the only ones allowed to make money off this plugin, otherwise do whatever" instead...
[–] echelon 3 days ago
I fundamentally understand what the Corridor Crew are doing here and know that it supports them. Yet they're not being overbearing or stifling the community.
[–] slopinthebag 1 day ago
we're talking like pytorch, numpy, and other large foundational libraries released not as shareware, but for free.
so either the foundational libraries are true oss, or the consuming libraries cannot be shareware. you cannot have it both ways.
everyone loves restrictive licences when it's their project of course
If everyone followed this model instead of open source, then Corridor Key itself would have to cover dozens of software licenses for all it's dependencies.