3 ms·
The 2% is stealing because no reasonable person would expect to see such a clause in an open source software project. The 2% clause was hidden, all the way at t
by op00to 5y ago
The 2% is stealing because no reasonable person would expect to see such a clause in an open source software project. The 2% clause was hidden, all the way at the end of the doc. The plugin author is a conman.
- teddyh 5y agoWhy do you call it Open Source? The plugin itself does not call itself Open Source, and clearly links to another project for those people who want an Open Source program.
- InsomniacL 5y agohttps://github.com/floatinghotpot/cordova-admob-pro/blob/master/LICENSE https://github.com/floatinghotpot/cordova-admob-pro/blob/mas... > Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files
- colejohnson66 5y agoThe code being free does not mean usage is free. Qt’s code is free to look at, but you still need to pay them for certain things. Licenses apply to the code, not what it does.
- InsomniacL 5y agoFirstly, I was addressing the claim in the comment I replied to that it's not open source. It's licenced under MIT That's not what the licence states at all... > Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person ... including without limitation the rights to use .. copies of the Software. The licence states Permission is granted free of charge to use the software, if the software is charging then that's a breach of the licence..?
- abofh 5y agoThey used the software, it did what it was programmed to do. The breach seems entirely on the licensee
- ipaddr 5y agoThis is used for popular game engines. It's not a bad model. If you make nothing you pay nothing if you profit you pay a %. It removes the need to buy upfront.