> Companies who want to use it commercially and have more than 1-5 employees would need to obtain a license.
> but you could, if you wanted to, add advertising into the opensource product and disallow it's removal unless a license is obtained.
That's not Open Source. The phrase Open Source has definite meanings and a strict definition, and people have a set of expectations when they hear that phrase. http://opensource.org/osd-annotated
Granted, you certainly can do what you are proposing, but
- That's a very different business model from an Open Source one, as commonly discussed and understood.
- You really shouldn't call it Open Source. This is important beyond mere pedantry as people spent a lot of time building up the Open Source movement with strong principals, and we all benefit immensely from it. If we allow the Open Source label to be ruined by things like this we will all suffer.
> but you could, if you wanted to, add advertising into the opensource product and disallow it's removal unless a license is obtained.
That's not Open Source. The phrase Open Source has definite meanings and a strict definition, and people have a set of expectations when they hear that phrase. http://opensource.org/osd-annotated
Granted, you certainly can do what you are proposing, but
- That's a very different business model from an Open Source one, as commonly discussed and understood.
- You really shouldn't call it Open Source. This is important beyond mere pedantry as people spent a lot of time building up the Open Source movement with strong principals, and we all benefit immensely from it. If we allow the Open Source label to be ruined by things like this we will all suffer.