News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Commons Clause. Parent comment

Re:Commons Clause by vmbrasseur on Wednesday August 22, 2018 @01:32AM (#17816535)
Open source has no place addressing the question of business model, as open source is about what people can do with the SOFTWARE. It removes the barriers to creating a business around that software, and that's where its concerns with business stop (and always have). It's up to the owners of that business to learn how to RUN a business.

In summary: "Open source" is not a business model and is not concerned with them. For information and guidance on business models, check with Harvard Business Review, MIT Sloan, and other reputable business publications.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Commons Clause by eloff on Wednesday August 22, 2018 @09:53AM (#17818656)
That's a regrettable attitude, because if open-source cannot address how it integrates as part of a profitable business, people will move away from open-source towards source-visible proprietary licenses. Like you're seeing here. It's in the best interests of the whole open-source community to take a proactive approach here and actually address the problems.

Specifically the problem of multi-billion dollar companies profiting from open-source software without giving anything back in a parasitic relationship.

Nothing exists in isolation, and open-source isn't a magical exception to that.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Commons Clause by kemitchell on Wednesday August 22, 2018 @02:07AM (#17816693)
License terms and business models intertwine. Choose Apache 2.0, you're going to have a hard time dual licensing. Choose something stronger, like AGPLv3, you'll have an easier time. Choose something even stronger, you may get locked in long Internet debates about whether it's still "open source".
[ Parent | on HN ]