4 ms·
Yes and no: I currently work for the editor of iTop (an open source ITSM software). Providing the software under an open source licence was a very early choice
by n0n0n4t0r 6y ago
Yes and no:
I currently work for the editor of iTop (an open source ITSM software).
Providing the software under an open source licence was a very early choice.
But what if a rogue concurrent decided to fork and hire engineers to provide it's own, better version of the soft while keeping it closed source?
The only open source licence providing protection that I'm aware of is the AGPL.
When you throw on the project your lifetime savings, it is quite a reassuring licence.
- juped 6y agoYou're doing proprietary software! You want to control it, you want to be the only person able to make money off it, and you magnanimously allow others to have the source under terms forbidding them from threatening your monopolies. I know we all have to eat; I'm not a zealot who thinks all software should be open either. But I don't see how developers exercising a monopoly in order to extract rent is software freedom. I just want some rectification of names.