Comment by jpetso

It's not open source anymore once you add this; open source is defined as having equal terms for everyone.

That said, a few entities are advocating for something like this, e.g. Bruce Perens with Post Open (https://postopen.org) or FUTO with "source first" (https://www.futo.org/about/futo-statement-on-opensource/).

A big hangup with all of this is, who is "us"? Whom do you owe money to?

The original author? What if I end up forking the software without the original authors involved, am I going to do it for free with all the proceeds going to people who aren't working on it anymore?

Or all future contributors? Using which formula to divvy up that money? Lines of code, useful bug reports written, number of tasks triaged, number of tasks resolved, documentation authored, users supported - what determines the relative amount of your contribution? Who receives the payment(s) from $megacorp, can they be trusted to redistribute it among contributors? What happens when the original maintainer / payment receiver steps back or scales back their contributions? How to avoid the divvy-up metric being gamed by people who care more about the money than the quality of the software?

Yes, it's possible; no, "just add to the license" doesn't cut it. This is a much bigger question. How you answer these questions determines whether your project even preserves open source's main (user-side) benefit of forkability.