This is specific enough that I don't think I can say "not legal advice", address as posed, and truly expect that nobody will jump to some conclusion without con

This is specific enough that I don't think I can say "not legal advice", address as posed, and truly expect that nobody will jump to some conclusion without consulting a lawyer. You'd really want to have a legal conversation about this kind of scenario, with full freedom to talk confidential details, in order to reach the right practical conclusion. What I can say is that the Defensive license comes from folks who deal with M&A, noncompetes, and resulting complexities all the time. 1.0.0 has a number of provisions addressed to potential operational and structural changes that could affect scope: https://polyformproject.org/licenses/defensive-licenses/1.0.0/#new-productcs https://polyformproject.org/licenses/defensive-licenses/1.0.... https://polyformproject.org/licenses/defensive-licenses/1.0.0/#discontinued-products https://polyformproject.org/licenses/defensive-licenses/1.0.... https://polyformproject.org/licenses/defensive-licenses/1.0.0/#sales-of-business https://polyformproject.org/licenses/defensive-licenses/1.0.... My own personal view is that the 1.0.0 terms will be perfectly well recommendable for a great many companies and use cases starting today. But also, emphatically, that any set of terms can be improved, especially in how they interact with external sources of complexity, like the corporate laws. I hope we'll see 1.0.1s and 1.3.0s and 2.0.0s and beyond for all the PolyForm licenses. If anyone is or has the gas to contribute to those conversations, please reach out: https://polyformproject.org/contribute/ https://polyformproject.org/contribute/