3 ms·

You can also expressly state that you have a commercial license too. Your entire license can be something like “ If you’re using it for commercial purposes, you

You can also expressly state that you have a commercial license too. Your entire license can be something like “ If you’re using it for commercial purposes, you must see a commercial license with XYZ. Otherwise, for all noncommercial uses, you may use the software according to the terms of the AGPL license.”

Daviey 2y ago
Please define "commercial use", because it means different things to different people. Also, lots of organisations have a blanket ban on AGPL, so offering it under an alternative commercial license is a great approach to enable them, but explicitly blocking it for "commercial use" makes it no longer free software, which would be a shame.
- malcolmgreaves 2y ago
  Commercial use is making money with the software. You could certainly iterate on the terms to strike the balance you want. You could make the source available to commercial clients as well. Each client can have a licensed tailored to their exact needs at a price that works for the people that make this software.
  - Daviey 2y ago
    It's much more nuanced than that... Sure, we can agree that if I host and charge users to use the service it is commercial usage... but: - If my limited company use it to manage internal development, but we aren't yet profitable (making money), is it commercial use? - If a company uses it to manage internal development, but it isn't the product itself, is it commercial use? - If I as an individual use it to manage a non-commercial side development project, and when it is then finished, I decide it is worth value and I sell it, does it become commercial usage, and my previous usage turns out to be non-compliant? - Is a charity using it to manage an internal development project "making money"? - If I as an individual provide a professional service to deploy this to "non-commercial" users, is this compliant by the license? You really can drive a truck through the definition of "commercial use", it is nearly as bad as the original JSON license, which stated "The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil." - which is helluva subjective.
mort96 2y ago
Wait which non-commercial uses would there be for this product? I guess you'd only use it as an issue tracker for open source projects with no funding? Regardless, by doing that the software would no longer be open source, and it seems like being open source is a significant part of the marketing strategy currently.
dizhn 2y ago
Doesn't the AGPL allow all uses including commercial? How would this work?
- malcolmgreaves 2y ago
  You can make a license with any terms you want. You can embed the exact text of the AGPL into another license. And that license can have an if-else branch where the predicate is “are you making money with this or not?”
  - dizhn 2y ago
    Yes of course but you can't call it the AGPL.

Daviey 2y ago

Please define "commercial use", because it means different things to different people. Also, lots of organisations have a blanket ban on AGPL, so offering it under an alternative commercial license is a great approach to enable them, but explicitly blocking it for "commercial use" makes it no longer free software, which would be a shame.

malcolmgreaves 2y ago
Commercial use is making money with the software. You could certainly iterate on the terms to strike the balance you want. You could make the source available to commercial clients as well. Each client can have a licensed tailored to their exact needs at a price that works for the people that make this software.
- Daviey 2y ago
  It's much more nuanced than that... Sure, we can agree that if I host and charge users to use the service it is commercial usage... but: - If my limited company use it to manage internal development, but we aren't yet profitable (making money), is it commercial use? - If a company uses it to manage internal development, but it isn't the product itself, is it commercial use? - If I as an individual use it to manage a non-commercial side development project, and when it is then finished, I decide it is worth value and I sell it, does it become commercial usage, and my previous usage turns out to be non-compliant? - Is a charity using it to manage an internal development project "making money"? - If I as an individual provide a professional service to deploy this to "non-commercial" users, is this compliant by the license? You really can drive a truck through the definition of "commercial use", it is nearly as bad as the original JSON license, which stated "The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil." - which is helluva subjective.

mort96 2y ago

Wait which non-commercial uses would there be for this product? I guess you'd only use it as an issue tracker for open source projects with no funding? Regardless, by doing that the software would no longer be open source, and it seems like being open source is a significant part of the marketing strategy currently.

dizhn 2y ago

Doesn't the AGPL allow all uses including commercial? How would this work?

malcolmgreaves 2y ago
You can make a license with any terms you want. You can embed the exact text of the AGPL into another license. And that license can have an if-else branch where the predicate is “are you making money with this or not?”
- dizhn 2y ago
  Yes of course but you can't call it the AGPL.