3 ms·
This motivated me to reread the commons clause again. I remain so disappointed in the naming and positioning of it. If you want to sell commercial modules that
by mobileexpert 8y ago
This motivated me to reread the commons clause again. I remain so disappointed in the naming and positioning of it. If you want to sell commercial modules that is totaly fine, but Apache 2 with commons doesn’t jump off the page as an unfree license (which prima facia it is). Should be called the ‘free for personal use’ email us for pricing clause instead.
- ianwalter 8y ago> Should be called the ‘free for personal use’ email us for pricing clause instead But this is a totally unfair characterization of the license, so they wouldn't call it this.
- andrewstuart 8y agoI'm not a fan of combining licences - it's just confusing. They should come up with some new license like the "totally free if you're not reselling it as a service" license or something like that. "The large print giveth, the small print taketh away".
- anonytrary 8y agoI think the license is interesting. I've been looking for a license that lets people tinker around with my software and use it in their commercial software, but protects me from getting my work or ideas stolen and resold...