Comment by simonw
8 hours ago
It's about unambiguously understanding exactly what my rights are and how I can use that code.
In the case of the janky new 37signals license: what exactly counts as "... where the primary value of the service is the functionality of the Software itself"?
Who gets to define the "primary value" of the thing I built?
So would you say that (in your opinion) a source available license could in theory call itself open source, if it used language you found to be unambiguous about your rights? Or is that not possible?
If it calls itself "open source" and I go to https://opensource.org/licenses and can't find an approved copy of the license - or I can't ask my favourite open source expert lawyer for their advice on it - then I don't want it to call itself open source.
Understood, thanks.