> but I think strict open source is the best net good for the world we live in.
Hard disagree. I think, importantly, that it is case-dependent.
I don't think it's "the best net good" that essentially the only companies that are able to make a profit from certain types of open-source products are Google, Amazon and Microsoft. It took quite a long time to determine if it would be possible for companies to build business models off open source, and so now that (again, for certain types of software) those business models basically evaporated due to the hyperscalers, I love this "fair source" movement.
Like you said, I think it's great that they are not trying to confuse this with open source. I think each has its place, and I think it's good that they sound like they're not trying to "compete" with open source, they're just trying to build a model where companies can be permissive with their source code but not have all their profits sucked up by giant tech companies.
Hard disagree. I think, importantly, that it is case-dependent.
I don't think it's "the best net good" that essentially the only companies that are able to make a profit from certain types of open-source products are Google, Amazon and Microsoft. It took quite a long time to determine if it would be possible for companies to build business models off open source, and so now that (again, for certain types of software) those business models basically evaporated due to the hyperscalers, I love this "fair source" movement.
Like you said, I think it's great that they are not trying to confuse this with open source. I think each has its place, and I think it's good that they sound like they're not trying to "compete" with open source, they're just trying to build a model where companies can be permissive with their source code but not have all their profits sucked up by giant tech companies.