> Which is a different way of saying that it is not free at all You are not free to do what you want and you are certainly not free to build a business on top o

> Which is a different way of saying that it is not free at all You are not free to do what you want and you are certainly not free to build a business on top of the software; that requires a non free closed source license. Most freedoms constrain others. The freedoms that the FSF care about are the freedoms of the users. Not the freedoms of the developers, and not the freedoms of the corporations that make the devices that sell to users. If you want to recognise and protect the rights of end users, you will constrain other peoples rights to exploit them in various ways. Which is to say that I think that GPLv3 (dual) licensed software does give genuine freedoms, even if they aren't the freedoms you are most interested in. Your freedom to create a consultancy around the GPLv3 licensed code and to charge for customisations or support are all protected too. Again, I understand that that isn't the kind of business you wanted to build on top of the software, but it's still a real freedom. I actually think a dual license might have been better in the case of terminusDB too.