alt Hacker Newsi like giving stuff away for free, but if it's tenable for the market i'll look at agpl3. The thing that would break my spirit is if something i made was used, for free, by a company to infringe on privacy or show interstitial ads. I used to not care, now i do.
Replies
microgpt • yesterday at 6:23 AM
I think the most moral position is reciprocity: I'll give you free stuff if you pay it back/forward. If you want to lock it down then too bad, I locked it down first so pay me.
Which is basically the situation you get from [A]GPL. You still have the option to offer a different license in exchange for money.
That's why the Affero GPL3.
Stops tivo-ization. And stops app-ification (making a GPL3 into a webapp and significant changes, but not sharing as well).
But most of the FLOSS orgs (FSF, etc) don't want blood from violator companies. Instead they just want mealy-mouth halfassed responses that amount to 'open the source'.
I remember what happened to copyright violators who copied Metallica and Britnry Spears back in the early 2000's. Fucking kids got hit with $4000 settlements or $135000 lawsuits.
That's the type of vigor and destructiveness I want FLOSS orgs to go after for-profit copyright violators.