Tiered open source license

Another maintainer of another open source project spilled the soykaf and stated that he no longer is going to maintain and give support for free. And I wonder. These fellows use MIT/Apache/LGPL/whatever laxx opens source license basically stripping themselves of any rights of demanding any payment if their projects become successful and used by a lot of profitable businesses GPL v.3 and alike on the other hand, AFAIK, ban commercial use So If there was a license, a tiered permissive open source one, which acted in a way similar to Epic Games' Unreal Engine's EULA in regard of extracting payments from the users. tl/dr for unfamiliar with the matters Unreal's EULA allows the usage of their product (which is Unreal Engine) for free unless the customer makes a $1M revenue per year, since that threshold - customer is obliged to purchase a license So wouldn't a license with similar mechanism potentially kill two birds with one stone: 1. allows developers to demand revenue from the customers who use their project for commercial purposes 2. allows the small guy still use open source for free because this story of developers' breakdown can pretty much snowballing into a scenario, where a handful of big corps can allow themselves to pay fees, while everyone else is fuarrked

>>55525 >must pay to use open source smol guys don't pay big guys do or you are referring to the whining dev?

>These fellows use MIT/Apache/LGPL/whatever laxx opens source license basically stripping themselves of any rights of demanding any payment if their projects become successful and used by a lot of profitable businesses They can change the license if they want. That would mean that, while corps can continue to develop their old software internally, new software would be closed source. >GPL v.3 and alike on the other hand, AFAIK, ban commercial use Nope, not at all. >1. allows developers to demand revenue from the customers who use their project for commercial purposes >2. allows the small guy still use open source for free The problem is the same as with GPL software, how do you ensure that corps aren't just downloading the free version? Would a court ever rule in your favor? The only way to make money off free software is to make the free version unusable from a corporate standpoint and add lots of features and a warranty in a closed source "pro" version. Like what nginx does.

>>55527 >The only way to make money off free software is to make the free version unusable from a corporate standpoint and add lots of features and a warranty in a closed source "pro" version. Like what nginx does. I agree. The devs shouldn't be that short-sighted and naive. The potential of worst-case scenario is still there though.

the only license to use is AGPL, literally you're retarded if you use any other license: >legally very hard to use for commercial use alone, but >can sell license exceptions so its easy to use for commercial use AGPL is best of all worlds, anyone without profit motive can use it completely for free with source code available, big players will pay for the exception to avoid legal issues, and you can carve out an exception for small players if you really feel guilty about charging small companies or individuals. I don't see why anyone would use BSD/MIT, just so you can get fuarrrked in the ass and work for free for big companies not paying you? If everyone used AGPL from the start, companies would still be forced to use it out of economics. It's cheaper to create a pool of money to pay for license exceptions than it is to train your employees on your new tech stack you created to avoid AGPL. Open source won at the corporate level not because it was free but because it makes it easy to replace employees (its easy to replace a React dev, very hard to replace a dev who built part of your internal system using an unknown stack and is the only one who knows it)

Big corps have always abused the open source community. They created a digital commons where people can create almost anything they want and plundered it and expected free everything without contributing anything to these projects. Or when they do it's for a self serving project that wouldn't be used outside of that.