"While the problem of financially supporting open-source development is real, and that is what FOSSA/Commons Clause are trying to promote, doing so with a clause restricting the scope of open-source licenses is a non-starter." WHY?!!!! Why is it a non-starter?
-
-
2a) Generally speaking: I mean that OSS projects register trademarks & defend/license their use for similar reasons other businesses do, to protect and make $ from brand value.
-
2b) Regarding OSI: I was mistaken about ownership of "open source" as a TM, but...clearly OSI sees value in being the one to control what we label as "open source."
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Ahhh, right. Makes sense! (And this seems to be one of the few vectors for truly exercising control over an open source project. EG: an event can't use "PyCon" unless they've adopted a CoC.)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.