[ThrowawayR2]

"open source" and "free software" originate in the movement started by Richard Stallman in the 1990s. The hackers of that era embraced his writings and became tireless advocates of FOSS specifically because of the rights promised, the so called Four Freedoms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software#Definition_and_t....

A variety of unscrupulous business people have wanted to call their software "open source" as a marketing tactic without adhering to the terms of the Four Freedoms. This practices is derisively known as "openwashing" or "FOSSwashing" and is a good way to alienate the cadre of senior hackers who are strong believers in the Four Freedoms, the ones who make FOSS a successful movement in the first place, and garner bad publicity. You are better off avoiding such deceptive marketing practices.

[cabronerp]

Thank you very much!

When I read the 4 freedoms listed here, it seemed that the Elastic license upholds these four freedoms. The only thing you can't do with the code is sell a hosted version of it. Am I reading that right?

[readerfeeder]

> The only thing you can't do with the code is sell a hosted version of it

That is a restriction to the *Freedom 0* : The freedom to use the program for any purpose

The purpose being to earn money by providing a hosted service using the software.

It also puts a limitation on *Freedom 1*: The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it do what you wish.

By preventing circumvention of licence key functionality.

That said, I believe those are reasonable restrictions. Any freedom without some limitations in how you can use them is unsustainable in the long run.

I am also considering Elastic Licence v2 for future software that may be monetised. But I would call it source available[1], and not free / open source to avoid confusion.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source-available_software),