|
|
|
|
|
by soumyadeb
2352 days ago
|
|
Fair enough. Having a "OSS-compliant" license which supports "payment to run the sofrware" would help open-source startups like us but I guess
"requiring payment" will hurt the "Freedom of Speech" part of OSS. An analogy would be - you have "Freedom of Speech" in a democracy but it requires a 100$ payment. Maybe? |
|
Closed source is like saying you aren't allowed to skim the book at the store before buying or share your favorite passages with a friend. That does infringe free speech. An author selling a book does not.
But just as with written media, there's plenty of room for both paid and free options that are both Open in the sense that the code is available. In a healthy ecosystem we'd have a lot of both, and no widespread bias against paid options. If anything businesses should have the opposite bias.