Skip to main content

Good post indeed. All this "Commons Clause" situation is so surrealistic! The fact that they are trying to "sell" the idea that one may attach something to an open source license that removes one of the core freedoms, and still call it open source. It seems Stallman was right again (sort of) about the conceptual weakness of "open source".

Let me correct myself - in the FAQ they state that they are not calling this open source (they call it "source-available"). However, taking an open source license and attaching something to it seems to me like a manipulative PR practice.