Clarification: license conversion after 2 years #41
Description
Activity
Thanks for the questions, @yoavbls. :)
I'll lose my competitive advantage completely after two years, which seems odd to me to reduce it from 4 years (BSL) into two.
We were originally thinking one year but then compromised on two as the equally disliked option between 1 and 4. 😁 If you can't ship additional value in two years then you might deserve the competition.
Is it a git release/tag?
Yes.
Is it a certain commit?
Yes.
For example, can I check out a commit from two years ago in an FSL repo and treat it like it's MIT/Apache 2.0?
Yes.
The key phrase in the FSL is "make available," which certainly includes pushing code to GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, etc. It could also mean publishing a package in a package repository. I guess it could mean mailing out a CD in a tin case, too. 🙃 😌
clarification on the website could be very helpful
Fair enough. PR in #42.
The explanation is great, and I've found it very clear now. Thank you!
And of course two years is enough if it's only for a version and not permanently for the project. I'm glad you reduced it from 4 years, good choice 🙂
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Fields
Give feedbackProjects
Milestone
Relationships
Participants
Hi there @chadwhitacre 👋
FSL looks promising in balancing between openness and fairness.
I read the explanation in fsl.software, and I understood that after two years,
the license converts to MIT/Apache 2.0, and from now on, it is no longer FSL, including any future versions.
I also read the full license and came to the same conclusion that I'll lose my competitive advantage completely after two years, which seems odd to me to reduce it from 4 years (BSL) into two.
I even asked ChatGPT and Gemini, And they validated my thoughts.
Only after I dug into closed issues I found this by chance: #29
And it made me understand that "software" is some version of the software.
Even though it's legally acceptable, it is easy to miss if you're not a legal expert.
Changes to the license aren't required, of course, but clarification on the website could be very helpful.
Maybe write that the software is actually a version of the software, and the license conversion applied to the version you released two years ago.
Explaining what a version is could also be helpful. Is it a git release/tag? Is it a certain commit?
For example, can I check out a commit from two years ago in an FSL repo and treat it like it's MIT/Apache 2.0?
Thanks in advance 🙂