I don't see how license changes that don't adversely affect the vast majority of users break trust, especially when the noops are effectively communicated. Has

I don't see how license changes that don't adversely affect the vast majority of users break trust, especially when the noops are effectively communicated. Hashi did a much job better job there than its predecessors. I don't see what locking corporations into future open releasing does to solve the general problem. The problem is fueling and operating maintenance and development for as long as those costs remain worthwhile. There are no perpetual motion machines. We have multiple data points from companies suggesting the rules of the game being played today create an inflection point away from universal permissive licensing. Restricting an organization's freedom of operation might maximize the time it holds out in forlorn hope on a pure, doomed model. It might also grind it to a halt when it could have kept going by compromise. A project steward going bust can send a clear signal to former free riders that they need to step up and organize or switch off. But in the meantime, what's to stop some other firm, without charter restrictions, stepping in to try the model the restricted firm wasn't allowed to? What's to stop the engineers at the restricted firm jumping ship? On the level of implementation, I wonder at the need for public benefit corporation structure, with all its vagueness, expenses, and complications. Are the feel-goods really worth the complication? You can put corporate-powers limitations in a "regular" corporation charter. That's a key part of how we turn C-corps into tax-exempt charities and business leagues. The restrictions we put in, say, 501(c)(3) charters also read vague, but they're statutory language we've been fighting about and refining by law over time. Conversely, putting eight novel, vaguely worded restrictions into a corporate charter, with or without line-by-line statements of intent, is putting a whole lot of fluff in the very beating heart of a governance structure. Who settles interpretation fights there, a judge in a shareholder derivative suit? I think the hullabaloo of the OpenAI Charter might be instructive.