[arboles]

Regarding BTPL, it's a license called Big Time Public License, which I mentioned in my original post. It was written by this guy that has written a bunch of experimental software licenses.[1]

If I were to choose a license in an informed way, I would want to really understand other people's choice of using OSS licenses. I almost exclusively use open-source/libre programs in my devices and make code contributions occasionally. I think I'm familiar with the ecosystem more than the commercial (proprietary) ecosystem. The freedom bestowed by owning the copy of the source code is very important in my opinion. While OSS is the best model we have right now, I and others see flaws, like dependency-chain failures, maintainer burnout and not-so-good incentives like keeping your system unpolished/hard to use so support can be your income.

Perhaps only 80% of the monetization will succeed because of loopholes, but suppose you can tack on monetization to an open-source license. It's still better than 0% monetization. In plain terms, my question is, even if it would no longer be real open-source (true), why wouldn't developers want that?

[1] https://github.com/berneout