3 ms·

> It is licensed under a modified form of the MIT license (similar in spirit to the Confluent open source license) which allows you to use Hibiki HTML without

> It is licensed under a modified form of the MIT license (similar in spirit to the Confluent open source license) which allows you to use Hibiki HTML without restrictions for almost all personal or commercial projects. > The Hibiki HTML license is not OSI approved. I know this is an ideological deal-breaker for some, but if you have a purely practical concern , I'm happy to offer a proprietary license that satisfies your legal department. Even though the restrictions might be reasonable, by making it non-standard ensures that any larger corp will not be able to use it.

sawka 5y ago
Totally understand. I went back and forth many times around the license. I figured I could always open it up more in the future. Happy to clarify use cases or write a proprietary license if need be if a particular corp is worried. Also, it is unencumbered if you use it for internal facing applications (the use case I was most focused on).
- netr0ute 5y ago
  Why make it so complicated? I would just use a vanilla AGPLv3.
  - sawka 5y ago
    This project spun out of my startup https://dashborg.net https://dashborg.net and I'm hoping to create a hosted SaaS service out of it with security/authentication and maybe some other premium features. I don't have that service yet, and I didn't want to get "cloud-poached" before I even had a chance to launch. That being said, I get the concerns. I'll likely re-license the core as vanilla MIT in the future.
    - jabbany 5y ago
      Couldn't a cloud service just get a team to do some clean room reverse engineering to make a similar or even compatible tool without violating copyright? IIRC software licenses are copyright licenses (you can't use the code / make derivatives based on the code) not patents (you can't make a product based on this _idea_).
      - sawka 5y ago
        Sure they could, but projects at big companies move so slowly, it would take them months just to staff the team, get a manager, a designer, and project-manager, and engineers assigned :) . Not really trying to restrict it, I want people to use it (even for free)! I just also want to be able to launch my startup
        leonidasv 5y ago
        If "projects at big companies move so slowly", why are you afraid of being "cloud-poached" then?
        sawka 5y ago
        Well, they move faster if they take your source code :)
    - netr0ute 5y ago
      Ironic, because getting "cloud-poached" would be one of my end goals.
naniwaduni 5y ago
Let's not kid ourselves, "larger corps" are at least as good a position as anyone else to decide whether they can work with the license, and plenty of them do it semi-routinely as part of B2B procurement. Optimizing your licensing to make things easier for them is like leaving your keys on the porch to save burglars the trouble of breaking in—there are decent enough reasons to do it, but this is one of the worst, and I have no idea how it became so ... popular.
Zababa 5y ago
Why? It seems like they can easily get a proprietary license. Or do you mean that no larger corp will use it for free?

sawka 5y ago

Totally understand. I went back and forth many times around the license. I figured I could always open it up more in the future. Happy to clarify use cases or write a proprietary license if need be if a particular corp is worried. Also, it is unencumbered if you use it for internal facing applications (the use case I was most focused on).

netr0ute 5y ago
Why make it so complicated? I would just use a vanilla AGPLv3.
- sawka 5y ago
  This project spun out of my startup https://dashborg.net https://dashborg.net and I'm hoping to create a hosted SaaS service out of it with security/authentication and maybe some other premium features. I don't have that service yet, and I didn't want to get "cloud-poached" before I even had a chance to launch. That being said, I get the concerns. I'll likely re-license the core as vanilla MIT in the future.
  - jabbany 5y ago
    Couldn't a cloud service just get a team to do some clean room reverse engineering to make a similar or even compatible tool without violating copyright? IIRC software licenses are copyright licenses (you can't use the code / make derivatives based on the code) not patents (you can't make a product based on this _idea_).
    - sawka 5y ago
      Sure they could, but projects at big companies move so slowly, it would take them months just to staff the team, get a manager, a designer, and project-manager, and engineers assigned :) . Not really trying to restrict it, I want people to use it (even for free)! I just also want to be able to launch my startup
      - leonidasv 5y ago
        If "projects at big companies move so slowly", why are you afraid of being "cloud-poached" then?
        sawka 5y ago
        Well, they move faster if they take your source code :)
  - netr0ute 5y ago
    Ironic, because getting "cloud-poached" would be one of my end goals.

naniwaduni 5y ago

Let's not kid ourselves, "larger corps" are at least as good a position as anyone else to decide whether they can work with the license, and plenty of them do it semi-routinely as part of B2B procurement. Optimizing your licensing to make things easier for them is like leaving your keys on the porch to save burglars the trouble of breaking in—there are decent enough reasons to do it, but this is one of the worst, and I have no idea how it became so ... popular.

Zababa 5y ago

Why? It seems like they can easily get a proprietary license. Or do you mean that no larger corp will use it for free?