The Fair Code site doesn't really explain how it works, but the Commons Clause site[1] has an FAQ. I agree about the problem: it's hard to run a business supporting a project if a competitor can come along and resell their code without any compensation. The commons clause says a company can't sell "a product or service whose value derives, entirely or substantially, from the functionality of the Software." I like the…
This description of the commons clause really irks me:
> if you just change the software name or few parts in the code, then you are not allowed to commercially use it without contacting the authors. However, if you modify it to a larger extent, then you are allowed to commercially use it without contacting the original developers.
Relative terms like "larger extent" scares away lawyers, and even anyone remotely used to legalese. You don't want more uncertainties and subjective classification than necessary when you're talking about something this important.
What then happens is: many of the projects are not picked up by competitors or corporations, they're not improved, and they die out, just like a completely closed source, proprietary project would have.
Open source is a way to boost the collaboration and success chance of your project. I think you either go with it, or you don't. I don't see that this solves any problems in such a way that it's worth it.