3 ms·

"post-open source license" That's a terrible reimagining, subtlying implying that open-source is old and past it. It's a pre-open source license. They've not

• cap11235 1y ago
  It's a license that tastes like the usual embrace, extend, extinguish.
• bsnnkv 1y ago
  > subtlying implying that open-source is old and past it It's really not that deep; U2 and Mogwai exist in the same timeline, in the same shared canon of contemporary music. > It's a pre-open source license This statement is strictly ahistorical; the earliest software licenses which made source code available to everyone and included restrictions on redistribution and/or use date back to the late 1990s[1][2]. You can certainly _try_ to make the case that these are the same as the Xerox license, but I don't think it would be a very strong one. [1]: https://spdx.org/licenses/Aladdin.html https://spdx.org/licenses/Aladdin.html [2]: https://spdx.org/licenses/QPL-1.0.html https://spdx.org/licenses/QPL-1.0.html