[andrewghull]

Co-creator here.

I thought AGPL was ok as well, but Commons Clause specifically tried to address perceived deficiencies in the AGPL although I admit that it didn't really seem to catch on. I'm not super well versed in the technical details. Why would you recommend AGPL?

[josephcsible]

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/CommonsClause has several links explaining what's wrong with the Commons Clause. The reason the AGPLv3 is my preferred replacement is that the FAANGs are irrationally afraid of it and refuse to let it be used anywhere in the company (e.g., https://opensource.google/documentation/reference/using/agpl...), but it's still 100% Free Software and Open Source and so allowed to be packaged in Linux distributions that disallow proprietary software.

[andrewghull]

Appreciate that! We'll take another look at this.

[pessimizer]

Remember (I'm sure you do) that you can relicense the code for the use of anyone who wants to pay you for it. AGPLv3 protects you, but doesn't hold you back.

[whatyesaid]

Damn, poor little Google seems really scared. I'm not sure if that info is true. You have to provide the whole source of the entire product and not just a segment of code (eg library) you forked which they do often?

[Tyr42]

I'd also suggesting reading some of /dev/lawyer's blog posts, though I'm cooking and can't pull up anything in particular ATM.