>People can develop software out in the open and say "use it as it is, for free!", "use it as part of a new product, for free!", but also say "please do not sell this software as it is" and "please do not make and sell an almost-identical product using this software".

The Common Clause isn't about preventing shovelware, it's specifically about restricting the user's freedom to sell any derivative work--it straight up says in the 1st FAQ that it's to transition existing actually FOSS projects to non-libre software.

Also that's just the way SirCmpwn writes!

I agree that even if it's not FOSS, this is a healthy and reasonable way to profit from software. Unfortunately, the Commons Clause explicitly forbids this healthy use.

“Sell” means...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

Imagine that you create new a new project greatly improving Commons Clause software, offer it for free, and offer paid consulting exclusively on your project, while refusing any work that involves consulting about the code you didn't write. That would still violate the license, which says that only the original license holder can do consulting on anything that's substantially derived from the core code. As written, there's no way at all to make money downstream from Commons Clause code, no matter how much value you add.