I think you're misreading the parent. They are not claiming that the Commons Clause is open source in any way. They're claiming that the portions being moved to

I think you're misreading the parent. They are not claiming that the Commons Clause is open source in any way. They're claiming that the portions being moved to the Commons Clause are not "Redis" but rather, some "enterprise modules". > 1/ No, Redis isn't proprietary. It's only some enterprise modules. The Commons Clause is mostly used to temporarily transition enterprise offering counterparts of OSS projects to source-available. Redis itself remains under BSD. From the article: > The Redis core is, and always will remain, an open source BSD license. Certain modules, however, are now licensed as “Apache 2.0 modified with Commons Clause.” I think the parent agrees with you, explicitly referring to those modules as "proprietary" and "source available".