[na85]

I don't pretend to be an industry expert but things seem different now, in this day of Everything-as-a-Service and subscriptions-as-primary-revenue-streams, from when Free Software first became A Thing.

It's just so easy these days for a corporate parasite like Amazon or Sony to rip off your hard work (ElasticSearch, BSD) and contribute essentially nothing back.

The SSPL seems like a perfectly rational response to this newly-emerged phenomenon.

[SXX]

I have serious question to you and everyone who try to advocate for SSPL. Don't you understand that this license has clause for SaaS providers that impossible to comply with?

Even if Amazon wanted to open source every single line of their own AWS code under AGPLv3 or APLv2 it's still not enough: the license require everything to be published under SSPL in very fuzzy terms that can even apply to OS kernel.

Even copyleft licenses always had a goal to increase amount of copyleft code, but SSPL only goal is to completely ban 3rd-party SaaS from using said software.

[na85]

> the license require everything to be published under SSPL in very fuzzy terms that can even apply to OS kernel.

Not even a little bit.

From the SSPL itself:

>However, it does not include the work's System Libraries, or general-purpose tools or generally available free programs which are used unmodified in performing those activities but which are not part of the work.

Explain to me again your FUD?