3 ms·

> of course I get to choose No, you are wrong here. Maybe it's semantics or whatever but a rights owner can impose restrictions based on conditions.

• ghaff 3y ago
  >Maybe it's semantics or whatever but a rights owner can impose restrictions based on conditions Yes. But what we seem to be going in circles on is that IF the rights holder wants to release the software under an OSI-approved license, they don't get to change that license, which is what you're doing if you want to say the software is only available under that license to some subset of users. Of course, they have the right simply not to use an OSI-approved license at all. But OSI-approved licenses all say you CAN'T impose certain restrictions if you're going to use them. What they CAN do is to dual license the software under an all rights reserved license and their own "source available" license (for eligible users). So long as an OSI-approved license isn't involved, they can do anything they're legally permitted to. If you want usage restrictions, just don't use an OSI-approved license. It's pretty simple and the result is effectively the same. They can even just cut and paste the MIT license and add a usage restriction clause. They just can't call it--and it isn't--the MIT license anymore.