[britzl]

The Defold Foundation does not call Defold FOSS. PERIOD. Stop saying that we do.

Next: The Defold Foundation is a foundation, not a corporation, and it is registered in Stockholm, Sweden. It has a different legal status than a corporation and while it is allowed to make a profit there are no stock holders or owners that can profit from the earnings.

Also, as a foundation, it has a clear set of goals that cannot be altered:

1. Make the Defold software available to the public.

2. Make the Defold source code available free of charge to a third-party.

3. Manage the Defold software through updates, modifications, development and support.

4. Prevent the Defold software from being commercialised by a third-party.

5. Support the open source community and the use of open licenses.

The reason we had to modify the Apache 2.0 license to add non-commercialization of the engine+editor was to fulfil goal #4.

You might now think that it's pretty stupid to use a modified license since goal #5 says "support the use of open licenses". I agree. I would have preferred an unmodified OS license for the main repo. BUT the Defold Foundation also maintain ~60 other open source repositories, most of them with an MIT License. 32 of these are Defold game engine extensions to interface with things such as In-App Purchases, Analytics, Ads, Camera etc.

Finally I want to say that we are not interested in "independent devs feeling suckered into doing free support". We obviously accept and appreciate contributions, but it is not our goal to make Defold into an engine which relies purely on community contributions to thrive. Defold depends on corporate sponsorships for long-term sustainability, not community contributions. And if we see prominent contributions coming from individuals we are very open to properly compensating said individuals from the funds of the foundation.

[pwdisswordfish0]

> The Defold Foundation does not call Defold FOSS. PERIOD. Stop saying that we do.

How about instead of telling me to stop doing something, you point to the place where I ever did? It's ridiculous that you responded to my comment complaining about strawmanning with... another (even worse) instance of it.

There are so many misdirected arguments in this comments that it doesn't even make sense to try responding to them.

[britzl]

I'm sorry, but your entire post sure sounded like you are upset with Defold claiming the product to be FOSS when in fact we do nothing of the sort.

If I misinterpreted your meaning then I apologise.