• Rogue@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    13 days ago

    That’s actually pretty reasonable. I’d be happy to make my open source projects compliant for a company - but they can damn well pay me for the effort.

      • Rogue@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        13 days ago

        Indeed, that’s why I use the AGPL license. Corporations hate it because it forces them to give back.

        • logging_strict@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          13 days ago

          it's free as in go pound sand if you aren't going to fund maintainers

          it doesn’t force them to do anything until devs refuse to work for any company that doesn’t.

          i’m with you on agplv3+. The copyright recognition document comes before the resume.

      • phase@lemmy.8th.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        13 days ago

        Well, if I understand things correctly, it may address a part of this issue indirectly: corps are responsible of what they use. If a part is open source they also have the opportunity to fix the problem themselves.

        Looks very nice to me.