51

There has been a lot of talk about companies and individuals adopting licenses that aren't OSI opensource to protect themselves from mega-corp leechers. Developers have also been condemned who put donation notices in the command-line or during package installation. Projects with opensource cores and paid extensions have also been targets of vitriol.

So, let's say we wanted to make it possible for the majority of developers to work on software that strictly follows the definition of opensource, which models would be acceptable to make enough money to work on those projects full-time?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 1 points 3 weeks ago

Do you believe breaking away from the strict OSI opensource definition would be acceptable? It could allow things like:

  • royalties for commercial instances
  • service fees for commercial instances
  • no commercial use

not all at one of course

Anti Commercial-AI license

this post was submitted on 06 May 2024
51 points (93.2% liked)

Open Source

28435 readers
164 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS