I hadn't come across this yet, interesting idea, and something I had wished for in the past. Ultimately I realized google groups already is something you can easily use - the bigger (social) problem is that not everyone is comfortable with text communication.
Campsite switches to Creative Commons Non-Commercial license
21–30 of 111 posts
Re: Campsite switches to Creative Commons Non-Commercial license
#22How exactly do you use what looks like work-planning software non-commerically? As for the license, it's their code and they can release it under whatever license they want, but they obviously shouldn't call it open source. Usually companies do this sort of thing to take advantage FOSS's reputation, but in this case it just looks like ignorance to me.
The Non-Commercial provision of the license is towards the app/code, not what the app is used for by end users.
You would not be able to install it and sell users right to use it, but you would be able to install it in-house for your own employees.
Re: Campsite switches to Creative Commons Non-Commercial license
#23Campsite is not open source. From the LICENSE file on the repo [0]: > Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International [0] https://github.com/campsite/campsite/blob/dae5db8611e8adc057...
Especially since the CC licenses are not recommended for software. Some call it "open-copyright" but I wouldn't use it for my applications.
Re: Campsite switches to Creative Commons Non-Commercial license
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
see also https://www.campsite.com/blog/campsite-winding-down sounds like there won't be a team to maintain it.
I don't understand why they wouldn't license it under an open-source software (OSS) license if they are closing the business anyway. This would be a great opportunity to foster a community around the project. Without an OSS license, it's unlikely that anyone will invest time and submit pull requests (PRs) to a non-OSS project.
Most probably as part of the agreement of being bought by Notion, to prevent competition.
Re: Campsite switches to Creative Commons Non-Commercial license
#25Campsite team, if you happen to be reading this: consider whether a more permissive license still meeting the FOSS definition, like GPL or AGPL, would better fit your needs.
GPL means that anyone who modifies the source code, or integrates it into a larger work, has to release the modified version.
So this would ensure that everyone’s contributions continue to help the wider community. As a side effect, it would also prevent anyone from using your work without releasing the source code for their project or product, benefitting open source as a whole.
The choice is obviously ultimately yours. I personally didn’t realize the benefits of GPL until recently.
Re: Campsite switches to Creative Commons Non-Commercial license
#26Nooo I can't make money off of other people's work! This is an affront to FOSS!
It is a 100% not open-source. It won't be maintained besides pull-requests AND if another company or individual develops this further, it can not be used commercially by anybody else but the company who released this. It this fair? Open source goes both ways.
Would an EPEL package constitute a violation?
Re: Campsite switches to Creative Commons Non-Commercial license
#27How exactly do you use what looks like work-planning software non-commerically? As for the license, it's their code and they can release it under whatever license they want, but they obviously shouldn't call it open source. Usually companies do this sort of thing to take advantage FOSS's reputation, but in this case it just looks like ignorance to me.
The Non-Commercial provision of the license is towards the app/code, not what the app is used for by end users. You would not be able to install it and sell users right to use it, but you would be able to install it in-house for your own employees.
If that's what the license says, fair enough, but that's not how I parsed it. This is not a software-specific license so it's not as clear as say the GPL, where there's very explicit language for source code, object code, compilation, execution, distribution, ...
Here's an excerpt from the license:
- 1. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Public
License, the Licensor hereby grants You a worldwide,
royalty-free, non-sublicensable, non-exclusive, irrevocable
license to exercise the Licensed Rights in the Licensed
Material to:
- A. reproduce and Share the Licensed Material, in whole
or in part, for NonCommercial purposes only; and
- B. produce, reproduce, and Share Adapted Material for
NonCommercial purposes only.
I can "produce", "reproduce" and "share" the licensed material. I'm definitely not sharing it, so if "running the code" is allowed at all, it must fall under the "produce" or "reproduce" categories. The text is pretty clear that you can only "produce" and "reproduce" it for NonCommercial purposes as well, so what does that leave me with?
Re: Campsite switches to Creative Commons Non-Commercial license
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Non-Commercial provision of the license is towards the app/code, not what the app is used for by end users. You would not be able to install it and sell users right to use it, but you would be able to install it in-house for your own employees.
If that's what the license says, fair enough, but that's not how I parsed it. This is not a software-specific license so it's not as clear as say the GPL, where there's very explicit language for source code, object code, compilation, execution, distribution, ... Here's an excerpt from the license: - 1. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Public License, the Licensor hereby grants You a worldwide, royalty-fre…
Yeah, I'm with you. CC is not well suited for something that can be run - unlike an image or music where its pretty clear what's happening when you use it.
Re: Campsite switches to Creative Commons Non-Commercial license
#29The license can be discussed here