191–200 of 966 posts
I think this is fair for him to do, and well within his rights. He’s clearly frustrated. I wish there was a better way for open source projects to solicit donations. It’s hard to get your boss to pay for software; it’s extra hard when you get no additional value. I feel like open source would have more luck if Issues could have attached bounties. I may not think to donate to faker.js, however as someone with access t…
Seriously. What's the point of open source if companies just steal it, build billion dollar industries on top, and then lock everything down? Apple is telling us we can't run our own software on their goddamned devices, yet they built their empire on open source. Look at Facebook, Google, Amazon. They've extracted all the blood they can and given us back scraps. AWS is repackaged software you pay more for. Yes, it's…
That sentence is a contradiction in itself.
> Apple is telling us we can't run our own software on their goddamned devices, yet they built their empire on open source.
Not on GPL-licensed open source, as far as I know.
> Look at Facebook, Google, Amazon. They've extracted all the blood they can and given us back scraps.
That is simply not true. A great deal of the open source software I use on a day-to-day basis is funded by some of these companies. The number of GitHub repositories they publish for all to use, under permissive licenses, is immense.
> The web is bloated with ads and tracking, AMP is given preference, Facebook and Twitter are testing the limits of democracy and radicalizing everyone to cancel one another.
You are right about this, but this is at best tangentially related to open source.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You offer a copyleft license like AGPL but also offer a paid license for those who don't want to deal with AGPL. Since you as the creator own the copyright, you can license it however you want, including multiple licenses simultaneously.
It's a pattern that works very well - many large companies have standing policies that they can't use copyleft licensed software so they have to get the paid license while those happy with the copyleft social contract get to enjoy and contribute for free.
Yes, a company will pay you to work on open source projects that are considered valuable for that company. I am surprised that Marak hasn't been offered a satisfactory job that pays six figures already. Perhaps he makes some mistakes while applying, or luck hasn't been on his side.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
GPLv4 needs to address a number of new problems: * "any user data serviced by this software must be easily exportable; no attempt must be made to block other 3rd party companies or services from consuming this data" * "if this software is itself sold as a service, any automation or tooling built in service of this system must also be made available as open source" * "any devices using this software must not actively…
GPLv4 cannot exist . The GPL was a clever hack the first time it became popular, but it is fundamentally a singleton that cannot be instantiated more than once. Not like we didn't try.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
BountySource did this. It failed.
That's because their product sucked, they charged excessive fees, and they were actively hostile to their users.
Seriously. What's the point of open source if companies just steal it, build billion dollar industries on top, and then lock everything down? Apple is telling us we can't run our own software on their goddamned devices, yet they built their empire on open source. Look at Facebook, Google, Amazon. They've extracted all the blood they can and given us back scraps. AWS is repackaged software you pay more for. Yes, it's…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel that the author started open source out of passion but is at the stage where he is sick of incredibly valuable companies using his work for profit without contributing back.
I can see that a passion to please can be disappointed if there is no reciprocity. But a passion to build great technology should not depend on who starts using it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with your sentiment, but this is not the right reaction. It won't improve anything. What's the point of open source if companies just steal it, build billion dollar industries on top, and then lock everything down? You are free to adjust the license to prevent this. But then tomorrow everybody comes and rants about that the GPL is too restrictive. That's the price we pay for this. It's the license that keeps…
GPLv4 needs to address a number of new problems: * "any user data serviced by this software must be easily exportable; no attempt must be made to block other 3rd party companies or services from consuming this data" * "if this software is itself sold as a service, any automation or tooling built in service of this system must also be made available as open source" * "any devices using this software must not actively…
https://duallicensing.com/ https://indieopensource.com/public-private/indies
EPPlus was relicensed earlier this year, and it's already generating enough revenue to pay two full-time developer salaries in Sweden.
https://blog.meilisearch.com/value-in-open-2-epplus/
The Parity Public License would be a suitable choice of public license. It's a strong copy-left license that requires licensees to open source the code they develop with the software. This means that developers of proprietary software would need to buy a private license. Parity hasn't been approved by the OSI due to their dysfunctional, inconsistent license review process, but it clearly fits the Open Source Definition.
For source-available licenses that don't fit the OSD, there are many options:
* Polyform Small Business License https://polyformproject.org/licenses/small-business/1.0.0
* Polyform Non-Commercial License https://polyformproject.org/licenses/noncommercial/1.0.0
* Prosperity Public License https://prosperitylicense.com/
* strictEq Free License https://stricteq.com/free/1.1.0
All of the licences mentioned above are flipped forms. They are short and written in every day language, so don't hesitate to read them. https://flippedform.com/
Kyle Mitchell has been putting great effort into helping developers get paid for their work. See also strictEq and License Zero.