4 ms·

I must not be making myself clear. Projects are free to choose permissive licenses like BSD. Companies are then free to use the code however they like and not

I must not be making myself clear. Projects are free to choose permissive licenses like BSD. Companies are then free to use the code however they like and not contribute back in any way. Projects are then free to be annoyed by this because they hoped that companies would contribute time and/or resouces out their own good will. Finally, projects are free to move to "business source" licenses because good will didn't work, so they need to utilize the legal system to ensure that large companies help sustain the project. What part of this do you disagree with?

madeofpalk 3y ago
Describing changing to a source-available licenses as "now utilizing the legal system" is strange. Projects choosing a permissive license like BSD is utilizing the legal system. BSD is a contract, a copyright license. It imposes restrictions/limitations/obligations, which can/would be enforced by a court.
- kdmccormick 3y ago
  Come on, you're unfairly quoting bits of my sentences in order to fuss over something unrelated to my point. I said: > so they need to utilize the legal system to ensure that large companies help sustain the project. No shit they were using the legal system before with the BSD license. I am saying that they are now using the legal system to ensure companies contribute, which is not something the BSD license did.
deadbunny 3y ago
Here is some software we made. Use it however and for whatever you like. Wait not like that.
- kdmccormick 3y ago
  Yes, literally this, but without the smug. Have you ever set lenient guidelines, people took advantage of them in a way you didn't like, so you were forced to tighten your guidelines in a way you didn't originally want to? eg: a professor establishes a generous late homework policy, which most students use reasonably, except a few who decide to turn in everthing on the last day of the term and make the TA's lives hell. Prof is allowed to be disappointed and then adjust their future terms' policies to be more specific (eg "submit assignments max 5 days late").
  - growse 3y ago
    For this analogy to work, it also needs to include the professor advertising their course and attracting good-will primarily on the basis of their generous policy, and then bait-and-switching involved participants when they later decided they didn't like it.
    - kdmccormick 3y ago
      The professor could advertise their course this way for Term 1, realize their policy isn't working as intended, and then change their policy (and advertising) as of Term 2. That's not a bait and switch. There was no promise that their course would have the generous original policy in for all terms in perpetuity. As far as I can tell, you are allowed to fork HashiCorp's code up until the point of license change, and continue to use it as you like, rebrand it as a new project, whatever. I could be wrong, but I don't think HashiCorp ever said "we will never ever change our license."

madeofpalk 3y ago

Describing changing to a source-available licenses as "now utilizing the legal system" is strange. Projects choosing a permissive license like BSD is utilizing the legal system. BSD is a contract, a copyright license. It imposes restrictions/limitations/obligations, which can/would be enforced by a court.

kdmccormick 3y ago
Come on, you're unfairly quoting bits of my sentences in order to fuss over something unrelated to my point. I said: > so they need to utilize the legal system to ensure that large companies help sustain the project. No shit they were using the legal system before with the BSD license. I am saying that they are now using the legal system to ensure companies contribute, which is not something the BSD license did.

deadbunny 3y ago

Here is some software we made. Use it however and for whatever you like. Wait not like that.

kdmccormick 3y ago
Yes, literally this, but without the smug. Have you ever set lenient guidelines, people took advantage of them in a way you didn't like, so you were forced to tighten your guidelines in a way you didn't originally want to? eg: a professor establishes a generous late homework policy, which most students use reasonably, except a few who decide to turn in everthing on the last day of the term and make the TA's lives hell. Prof is allowed to be disappointed and then adjust their future terms' policies to be more specific (eg "submit assignments max 5 days late").
- growse 3y ago
  For this analogy to work, it also needs to include the professor advertising their course and attracting good-will primarily on the basis of their generous policy, and then bait-and-switching involved participants when they later decided they didn't like it.
  - kdmccormick 3y ago
    The professor could advertise their course this way for Term 1, realize their policy isn't working as intended, and then change their policy (and advertising) as of Term 2. That's not a bait and switch. There was no promise that their course would have the generous original policy in for all terms in perpetuity. As far as I can tell, you are allowed to fork HashiCorp's code up until the point of license change, and continue to use it as you like, rebrand it as a new project, whatever. I could be wrong, but I don't think HashiCorp ever said "we will never ever change our license."