[vvillena]

The article states two different issues at play. I agree with you on the first one: everyone can license their project however they want. It is your code after all.

The second issue is a bit more complicated, and I can't agree with you on this. If adding the Commons Clause to a license changes the license, using the parent's license name to take advantage of brand recognition is misleading for the end users. It is false advertising, and it hurts the brand of the parent license.

If "Apache 2.0 + Commons Clause" is so common and so appreciated, surely it wouldn't be problematic to rename the whole thing and avoid this issue.