> For some reason, your argument completely eliminates the author from the decision process. Do you find that to be fair or in good faith? As someone reading t

> For some reason, your argument completely eliminates the author from the decision process. Do you find that to be fair or in good faith? As someone reading through this: Yes. I find that argument both reasonable and fair. The author is free to ask for compensation up front in exchange for the tool they've built. They can also just simply refuse to license it in the first place. But a license that I can violate if the author simply changes their mind is quicksand: Nothing of value can be built on it, because it might sink at ANY POINT. It's literally unusable as a tool.