~~Seems to be a misunderstanding on their part about the license?~~
Edit: seems like the mods indeed checked the licence
In any case, !privacy@programming.dev is the second most active community on the topic
~~Seems to be a misunderstanding on their part about the license?~~
Edit: seems like the mods indeed checked the licence
In any case, !privacy@programming.dev is the second most active community on the topic
Seems to be a misunderstanding on their part about the license?
No, unlike most FUTO proponents, I have actually read and understood the license :)
I read and understood the license, I just wasn't aware that restricting commercial use makes it proprietary
Perhaps "source available" is a more apt term for this kind of license
Source available is indeed the correct term for this type of license, but FUTO doesn't like it because that category also includes other licenses which impose different restrictions than they do. So, they now are calling theirs "source first" instead. 🤷
At least they stopped calling it open source!
I don't understand the nuance in licensing but how is this not open source?
"Allow users to see the source code of all of our software.
Ensure that you can modify the source code for your own use, and redistribute it."
"Roughly, it means that the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software. "
Which is what that software does. Which is why I'm confused.
Are they scammers that claim to publish their code but don't?
People can't change and distribute it under their license
They said you can. The restriction is that you can't make money off it. Which doesn't seem against the spirit of open source. Nothing in open source requires that you give your code to corporations for free.
Please look up the (A)GPL and stop helping Futo with their open washing
Come on, there's no need to be hostile. Look at my history. I've never heard of them before. Nor am I an expert on the various licenses.
Agpl is stronger about forcing release of forked source code but doesn't say anything about commercial use. What is an existing GPL variant that prevents commercial use?
Hey, sorry for coming off harsh. It's just that I've had enough with people claiming Futo is somehow the good guy here. Preventing commercial use is against everything FLOSS and basically makes forks impossible and any contribution to the project meaningless...
Also "commercial use" is incredibly broad, in Germany e.g. all commercial websites must have an imprint and IIRC some court ruled that even private websites must have one as well, so there is that. Futos' licensing is really a scummy move akin to MongoDBs SSPL.
The idea behind the GPL is that any change you make has to be available as source code to the users in addition to the four essential freedoms. The GPLv3 patched some exploits (LOL) regarding proprietary devices (ab)using free/libre software and the AGPL patches the "providing a service over a website" loophole which is not covered by the vanilla GPL.
This page by Codeberg has a nice decision tree regarding choosing an actually free/libre license and is also a good read in general
https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/licensing/
Preventing commercial use is against everything FLOSS
I upload 3d models to printables (prusa's online library). The uploads have a license checkbox list: free to download, free to modify, must list original author in remix, and/or no commercial reuse. You check off whatever you want.
Preventing commercial use is not against OpenSource. It's origin was because of commercial abuse. The OpenSource definition https://opensource.org/osd says no discrimination in use by businesses. It does not say you must allow companies to take your work and sell it for profit. Using open source software is not the same as selling it.
Creative commons has a non commercial license.
This is a community in the spirit of "Am I The Asshole" where people can post their own bans from lemmy or reddit or whatever and get some feedback from others whether the ban was justified or not.
Sometimes one just wants to be able to challenge the arguments some mod made and this could be the place for that.
All posts should follow this basic structure:
Expect to receive feedback about your posts, they might even be negative.
Make sure you follow this instance's code of conduct. In other words we won't allow bellyaching about being sanctioned for hate speech or bigotry.
YTPB matrix channel: For real-time discussions about bastards or to appeal mod actions in YPTB itself.
Some acronyms you might see.
Relevant comms