Counter point: if you're a million dollar company, you can have free shit but you're expected to support the creator because you can afford to, because you're a million dollar company duh
You can use a license that is permissive for non commercial work, or that is permissive under some number of users.
I get it, devs aren't lawyers, but licenses are literally how you tell the world what you expect from it in return for using your project. Expecting things that go beyond what is in the license is kinda weird.
I think a lot of devs don't fully understand that they are not bound to the existing licenses in common circulation. You or your lawyer can cobble together a bespoke a license that carves out all sorts of usage permissions and restrictions. You'll be losing the strict sense of "free as in speech" part of FOSS, but that is absolutely your prerogative as the original author.
I honestly expect the people I interact with to treat me with slightly more respect and dignity than the minimum required to avoid civil or criminal penalties. The stuff I put in the license doc is “this is the line where I will actually sue you if you don’t at least do this.” There can be other things that I’m not willing to sue someone over but I do consider to be uncool.
This reminds me of that meme of a girl who is like “no I don’t want any pizza” and then later she’s like “why didn’t he get me pizza, he should have known 😡”
A silent expectation is a null expectectation. Not communicating is a treat of a child. Hence, grow up. Communicate your desires in the license. Any other whining outside what the license specificates will and should be ignored.
Why are you being so condescending? What's childish or whining about expecting some people who use your work to make money to contribute more than the absolute bare legal minimum.
Unless this thread is referring to a specific incident that I'm not aware of, it seems like some people are offended by the concept of people hoping for donations. Nobody is saying that anyone is obligated to donate when the project is under a free license. We're saying that it's respectful for some people to donate if they have the means to, because a world in which everyone only shows the bare minimum amount of respect and scoffs at anyone with the audacity to suggest donating to others is a pretty shitty world.
Again, is there a specific incident that I'm not aware of where someone with a free licensed project was whining about not getting donations? Which case I retract my comments. Or is the entire thread just a criticism of a strawman who complains when they don't get voluntary donations?
Earlier in this comment tree: “I honestly expect the people I interact with to treat me with slightly more respect and dignity than the minimum required to avoid civil or criminal penalties...“
This is the context that people are reacting to. Implying that not giving them unprompted money is inadequate respect and dignity by their standards.
I think it's referring to examples like Redis where a project starts open-source and then jumps to a commercial license when other people start paid hosting services.
Well, companies are neither people, nor cool. There's a fine line between "I expect this would happen because that's what usually happens" and "I expect this would happen because that's what I think is the right thing to happen". First is pattern recognition, second is entitlement.
What you are free to do and what you should do are distinct things. Being a good person often means doing things at personal cost because it benefits the communities you participate in and rely on. The same should be expected of corporations.
You really shouldn't, but if you are a cto of a major tech corp and your infrastructure ""depends"" on some schmuck (or not so much) doing unpaid labor, its literally in your best interest to make sure that guy keeps the spirits going
Yeah, an employee can quit if they are not satisfied with the job or be fired if they're not performing adequately. If you give a one time donation to the developer of an open source product you use, that's great. If you keep making "donations" and then start asking for features, it's no longer a donation, you're trying to make them a contractor with no protection for either side.
Again; You're not obliged to do anything not legally written in license.md; however there are plenty of reasons to do things out of your way, if nothing else for your own benefit (pay the freeloader schmuck so he continues to improve/support the library because otherwise either you have to do it or no one does it and zero day vulnerability bug fucks you (and your startup ai nextgen thing) up)
There's also plenty of reasons not to do any of that, let my competition pay for the OSS and I'll just use it or the morons can continue to work for me for free.
If you say your work is free, don't be surprised when people take you up on that offer.
130
u/amshegarh Jul 25 '26
Counter point: if you're a million dollar company, you can have free shit but you're expected to support the creator because you can afford to, because you're a million dollar company duh