Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ShaneCurcuru 815 days ago
SSPL is definitely not open source, it violates #6:

https://opensource.org/definition-annotated#6

That's the point of open source, and free software in a way as well. Copyleft licenses have restrictions, but as long as you follow those restrictions, you can build whatever you want using the software. SSPL, FSL, BUSL licenses outright prevent you from competing in certain commercial ways, no matter what.

Just because most business models don't want to comply with copyleft doesn't mean it's not open source - it just means it doesn't fit your business model.
1 comments
bit_flipper 815 days ago
You can also build whatever you want with SSPL, as long as absolutely everything you use to run a service that supports it is also licensed as SSPL. It's not that different from the AGPL in spirit.
link
jrochkind1 813 days ago
> as long as absolutely everything you use to run a service that supports it is also licensed as SSPL.

There isn't an SPPL-licensed OS available, is there? Is that not included in "absolutely everything you use to run"? I actually don't know, I haven't tried to make sense of the license. Is there a boundary somehow that you are allowed to run it on a non-SSPL OS? Where is the boundary exactly, I might be using many other open source licensed (or even third-party proprietary licensed tools) in my total ops stack -- which of them don't have to be SPPL?

link