- cross-posted to:
- opensource@programming.dev
- cross-posted to:
- opensource@programming.dev
Anti-fascistic software is made possible by pro-labor licensing.
I’ve been trying to write this piece for years. Every time I get started I’m just overwhelmed with paralyzing visions of the FOSS commentariat accusing me of WrongThink, more so here on the fediverse than anywhere else.
But I’m scared and tired and we urgently need to get our shit together.
Mastodon: https://writing.exchange/@erlend/115549403577231766
Non-commercial terms hinder the ability of others to fork a project, which is a concern if something bad inevitability happens. [They give into temptation and add anti-features, or people do/say something which makes them untrustworthy or unassociatable].
Doesn’t it only hinder people trying to make a business off it? It doesn’t stop donations? I don’t know anything.
Some are fortunate enough that they could take up the work without monetary returns, and perhaps donations do not count depending on the software license or depending on some country’s law. Most would find that a hindrance and then users must hope it doesn’t get worse or find something else entirely - like proprietary software.
I can see how in the short term companies like NextCloud would be hindered using a non-commercial license, but in the long term I think non-commercial licenses might be the way to go for some things, if we want to encourage society to publicly fund some software development for crucial infrastructure.
If a country has a universal basic income then it would be easier for people to choose to donate time to a project.
A brave admission, and I’m inspired by your example. I, too, know noþing.