[nqzero]

  - me: solo dev or small team
  - you: microsoft, mongo, redis

one of us is being disingenuous, but i don't believe it's me (username on point ;)

i agree with both your examples being bad. for #2, they required one-sided CLAs while "open source". the alternative to signing the CLA was to fork, which is rarely well-received by the community, ie the same basic issue i raised

FLOSS is great in that it can facilitate collaboration and adoption, but at the expense of greatly limiting the business models. and even then context still matters - eg there's big difference between the kernel with 1000s of independent contributors, and mongo with one party holding CLA rights to the entire codebase (FLOSS in name only, i'd argue)

  - for me, what's ultimately important is that people are free and that people that do good work are rewarded
  - software licenses are just a tool to help us get there
  - non-FLOSS might enable much of that same good while scaling to more business models and software
  - they might ultimately be good for society, but getting the details right is hard
  - i'm no longer actively working on my own stuff, but my attempt was: https://github.com/db4j/pupl
  - note: if i was doing this today, the core limit would be much higher