Maybe the software license should have been one that only allows non commercial use or the open sourcing of all derivative code.
This is hard though. You present commercial license, and you’ll cut out a good 80-90% of the potential users, which means the OSS project is way more likely to die.
I think CTOs should be okay with allowing their employees to contribute to projects they use. In my first hand experience, they’re more likely to say “no we shouldn’t”. It’s unfair really.
Meanwhile, corpos scrambling to take down their “we ❤️ [profiting from] open source” banners.
The parasite class didn’t get rich by paying people what they’re worth, and I doubt they’re going to start now
On the one hand I like the sentiment of paying for open source software. But on the other hand the free part of free software is kind of very on the nose.
I hope this Doesn’t catch on. It is open for a reason. Damn drama makers.
You hope the idea that “commerical companies that have profited off of FOSS feel compelled and pledge to contribute to the maintainence and development of those projects” doesn’t catch on?
Why?
