Show threadGiacomo TesioMar 3
@[email protected]
non-FOSS source-available licenses, and who uses them and why
You seems only interested in licenses designed to protect corporate interests. They exist to... protect some corporate interests.

Of those you listed, #SSPL was rejected by #OSI for a single reasons: #Amazon money as a premium sponsor, but was otherwise just a slightly tweaked #AGPLv3.

Anyway, if you only care about #opensource (thus commercial) stuff, you basically listed all relevan ones.

Yet not all "non #FOSS" licenses exist to please corporate greed.

Many other licenses don't give a shit about business or "susteinability" but try a better balance between #freedom and other political values.

A well known example is #HESSLA
https://web.archive.org/web/20120204033625/http://www.hacktivismo.com/about/hessla.php

Another less known example of a license used by #hacktivists is the #HackingLicense: https://monitora-pa.it/LICENSE.txt

I use this license in all my side projects: feel free to ask me anything.

@[email protected]
OSI Corporate Sponsors & Support | Open Source Initiative

Show threadJames BrittJan 21, 2025

@drunkenmadman

"The all-new Rudolf Hessla sedan"

#Hessla #Tesla

ShamarJan 17, 2020

@dgold after reading this https://lipu.dgold.eu/original-sin.html I think you might find interesting #HESSLA http://www.hacktivismo.com/about/hessla.php and my #HackingLicense http://www.tesio.it/documents/HACK.txt

I've found particularly interesting your insights about #individualism and #Capitalism in #FreeSoftware.

I reached a similar conclusion, but I noticed that one of the issue is that corporations have legal personhood, so that such individualism somehow works in their favour instead of the whole humanity.

Thus the restrictions to organizations in the Hacking License.

The Original Sin of Free Software

Not a manifesto, not a declaration. An essay about the inherent problems at the core of Free and Open Source Software.

lipu.dgold.eu