[tediousdemise]

IANAL but I'd like a license that goes something like this:

Companies: If you are working for a company/corporation/profit-generating entity, or otherwise intend to sell or use such code derived from this repository for profit-generating purposes, you shall not be permitted to use any of the source code herein until you email me (author email here) and we can come up with the appropriate terms and conditions for your use case.

Everyone else: Have fun!

Obviously it's missing some necessary edge cases and disclaimers, but yeah.

[stevage]

I mean, that's basically what CC-BY-NC is. Any licence that prohibits commercial use does not prohibit an alternative commercial licence being negotiated.

[stavros]

Maybe the Prosperity License:

https://prosperitylicense.com/versions/3.0.0

[pbronez]

I would love a reference to a formalized version of this..

Edit: Found Polyform! https://polyformproject.org/what-is-polyform/

[pbronez]

Found one - Polyform

https://polyformproject.org/what-is-polyform/

> PolyForm is a project to draft and make freely available plain-language source code licenses with limited rights. > > Source code licenses with limited rights? What does that mean? Many software developers want to make software available under source code licenses that grant some, but not all rights. Some licenses that have been released before include the Commons Clause, Elastic and Confluent licenses, and others. These licenses grant broad rights, including source code access, but reserve some rights to the licensor.

[shawnz]

Imagine you license a word processor this way, would it then be a violation to use that word processor to edit your resume?

[Kwpolska]

Microsoft Office does that: https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/msoffice/forum/all/licen...

It might be technically a violation, but nobody’s going to send a license audit to a private citizen.

[tediousdemise]

Technically, yes! A perfect example of an edge case that I knew would be difficult to find.

Very clever!

[shawnz]

To be clear I'm not just trying to be a pedant and poke holes in your legalese here. I'm trying to show that it is genuinely hard to draw a line between what kinds of profit seeking are morally acceptable and what are not. People generally deserve to seek out prosperity, and I suspect in most cases trying to differentiate between these cases will end up being a game of "people richer than me have to pay, people poorer get it for free" which is way less morally justified than the current situation with software licenses.