The author is missing the point. This is trademark battle, not a licensing one. OSS is not in more trouble than it ever was. Software is, but that's a different

The author is missing the point. This is trademark battle, not a licensing one. OSS is not in more trouble than it ever was. Software is, but that's a different problem. The assumption that you're going to make something open source and get all the benefits of open source distribution while assuming that you're going to make money on it because you deserve it, while others don't is wrong. If you have any assumptions about how and to whom your software will make money. Put them in the license.