zlacker

>>gnufx+(OP)
He laments that users "don't know about the freedoms we promote which are increasingly in their interest", but wasn't this the point of Open Source as compared to Free Software, to refocus the messaging from the user's freedoms to the economic benefit for companies?

The Free Software Definition mentions "user" 22 times and "freedom" 79 times, whereas the Open Source Definition has zero occurrences of these terms. It doesn't seem surprising that the user freedom message isn't getting through if you completely scrub it from the messaging.

>>ptx+a5
IMO, the SSPL solves this. If you only use/develop FOSS stuff as RMS intended, you can use SSPL without an issue. Don't use or develop FOSS everywhere? Pay for a separate license. It's unfortunate that OSI and friends are OK with the AGPL but not the SSPL, and IMO shows that they think the status quo is OK when clearly it's sustainable for FOSS creators.

>>candid+Vj
Field of endeavour is an oss freedom

Armin ronacher, also had some thoughts on this recently, via a license that converts to OSS. https://lucumr.pocoo.org/2023/12/25/life-and-death-of-open-s...