> However, distributing such a modified license under the Apache umbrella potentially harms that goal by muddying the meaning of "Apache licensed". Exactly. T

> However, distributing such a modified license under the Apache umbrella potentially harms that goal by muddying the meaning of "Apache licensed". Exactly. The ASF fosters a permissive ecosystem, characterized by low risk of litigation. If you attribute ALv2-licensed dependencies properly, you should feel confident that you are pretty much in the clear. If you screw up and fail to attribute, it's easy to achieve compliance — just add the attributions. You need not worry about publishing your proprietary code under a copyleft license, stripping out the ALv2 dependencies, or other more involved remedies. This low risk environment is key to the participation of many users, especially risk-averse corporate contributors. It is a fundamental aspect of the ASF culture and mission. The "Apache + Commons Clause" license radically undermines that, because if you are a commercial user, you may well get sued. The "Apache" name doesn't belong anywhere near a license which includes the Commons Clause.