Re:An update to the Timescale license
by dragonwriter on Friday September 25, 2020 @02:02PM
(#24592436)
>But it is nearly functionally identical, that's the fact of the matter
No, its not. Its superficially similar (in much the same way that, say, the Constitution of the USSR was superficially similar to a liberal democratic constitution), but not having key commercial uses reserved for a rent-seeking copyright owner is central to the function of F/OSS.
> It's open source with one tiny restriction that matters to nearly nobody.
It matters to lots of people; sure, very few people are likely to directly exercise it, but that others are free to exercise it is central to the value proposition of open source for other users.
Re:An update to the Timescale license
by eloff on Friday September 25, 2020 @02:57PM
(#24592990)
I disagree completely. I'm trying to understand where you're coming from, but I just don't. I think we have irreconcilable viewpoints here, and there's no further discussion possible.
No, its not. Its superficially similar (in much the same way that, say, the Constitution of the USSR was superficially similar to a liberal democratic constitution), but not having key commercial uses reserved for a rent-seeking copyright owner is central to the function of F/OSS.
> It's open source with one tiny restriction that matters to nearly nobody.
It matters to lots of people; sure, very few people are likely to directly exercise it, but that others are free to exercise it is central to the value proposition of open source for other users.