If companies with commercial uses supported open source project by funding or contributing, things could have been better.

all 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Seems reasonable to me. Open Source is seen as virtuous and noble, but then big companies take that to mean they can leach off it while making huge profits.

It's very similar to the attitude to tax - companies avoid it aggressively, yet they use roads, benefit from schools, hospitals, rubbish collection, energy infrastructure and national security.

Maybe it's time for an ethos shift in the open source community. For example switching to licenses that stipulate if used commercially at certains scale, fees need to be paid.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    I'd be wary of switching to a non-free license. The freedom to use for whatever is fairly core to the four freedoms. However all the main licenses specify the code is as-is and it's perfectly fair for the maintainer not to take on the unpaid burden on behalf of others making money with their work.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago
    1 comment in c/opensource@lemmy.ml view that post
    [–] 8 points 1 year ago*

    flashes back to OpenSSL 1.0 days, sees same headlines with that library

    What year is it?!

  • source