News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Commons Clause by peterwwillis on Wednesday August 22, 2018 @02:14AM (#17816711)
According to this new clause, you may never provide consulting services for a fee if it involves these modules. Still cool?
Re:Commons Clause by paulsutter on Wednesday August 22, 2018 @02:27AM (#17816761)
No, the value of your consulting derives from your skill and effort.

Definitely share with them any proposed wording changes that could clarify the matter. I’m sure that’s not their intent. Lawyer friends may be able to help both with interpretation and comments.

Think of this as “license r&d” rather than a rush to verdict.

Re:Commons Clause by mijoharas on Wednesday August 22, 2018 @08:11AM (#17818101)
> For purposes of the foregoing, “Sell” means practicing any or all of the rights granted to you under the License to provide to third parties, for a fee or other consideration (including without limitation fees for hosting or consulting/ support services related to the Software), a product or service whose value derives, entirely or substantially, from the functionality of the Software.

If you consult for a company optimize a bunch of their redis queries, it could easily be argued that your consulting service has value that derives substantially from redis.

This licence worries me somewhat. I would definitely prefer a GPL and ask me if you want to licence it kind of situation as you definitely know where you are.

Guess we'll see what happens with this.

EDIT: IANAL

Re:Commons Clause by imhoguy on Wednesday August 22, 2018 @09:18AM (#17818457)
I think AGPL would suit them well.
Re:Commons Clause by slavak on Wednesday August 22, 2018 @09:28AM (#17818522)
I believe most of the modules that have been re-licensed under this new license were previously AGPL.