That’s why Foss will always be better, and we need to support these developers. They also need to protect their software better from capitalist ghouls that will profit from it for free
What I mean is better licenses that make sure you get paid if companies profit from it, and harsher penalties for those that get caught infringing the license
Such a license wouldn’t fit the free software or the open source definitions, but I find it interesting that there has been a small, yet apparently growing, group of people unsatisfied with our current open licensing, for different reasons, and proposing new ideas and concepts that wouldn’t fit these definitions.
That’s why Foss will always be better, and we need to support these developers. They also need to protect their software better from capitalist ghouls that will profit from it for free
Protecting FOSS is impossible, there will always be a company that uses your codebase, credits you and includes advertisements to your program.
We need to make using FOSS projects the default and using the corporate options as the backup option.
What I mean is better licenses that make sure you get paid if companies profit from it, and harsher penalties for those that get caught infringing the license
Such a license wouldn’t fit the free software or the open source definitions, but I find it interesting that there has been a small, yet apparently growing, group of people unsatisfied with our current open licensing, for different reasons, and proposing new ideas and concepts that wouldn’t fit these definitions.