• umbrella@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    i think we could bake some form of “free for personal use, paid for corporate use” clause in our foss licenses tbh

    • Kurokujo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      That’s not a terrible idea as long as it’s significantly cheaper than the closed alternatives. I think the biggest issue would be that orgs that pay would expect a certain level of service that a community project might not be able to deliver on.

      • Bizarroland@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Most of the small to mid size companies that I have worked for would choose a larger more established system that costs more even if it offers less over a self-hosted one that they had to pay some sort of fee for.

        Is like this weird idea in the business world that if you’re using Foss systems that it must be completely free, and that the reason why you are using it is because you are broke or cheap.

    • msage@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I don’t think that is necessary, as some companies do actually help, either with money or even dedicated staff, which can be as good or better.

      We should push for developers to promote the idea of more help towards FOSS projects, maybe find some hours a month, or send any money saved from not paying for licenses.