Just something to think about is all. I don't want to pressure you into OSS, I do think closed source can be necessary in some cases. Specifically for nostr, I think many of us come here expecting to escape the requirement to blindly trust the product and its developers. I trust many of us here to be morally aligned but that can be quite naive.
I personally prefer copy-left. Many prefer completely permissive licensing. For code that produces a product, I would personally (and usually do for my own code) choose the GPLv2+ or AGPLv3+. Both areGNU copy-left license.
It requires anyone who uses your code build their own product to release your source (or their modified source) publicly. Damus is GPL I believe and its looks like Amethyst is MIT. AGPL has the requirement for server usage. That is if your code sits behind a production application but is not public facing, if changes were made, your code must be made available (with your name on it!) both modified AND your original source code.
There are other more and less permissive licenses out there, but I appreciate the history of GNU and FSF defending developers using their licenses.
It's probably going to take a while to choose a license you like, but it's meant to protect you AND your users/community.
I may be on the extreme side, I won't lie, I like owning my code, and having my name displayed because I'm proud and have an ego, but I highly respect my user's rights, so once my code hits a user's hands, its theirs to do what they want with it. Free and always available as long as I'm working on it. That's why I use copy-left.
ChipTuner
npub1qdj…fqm7
2024-06-14 20:39:42
in reply to nevent1q…khlg
Author Public Key
npub1qdjn8j4gwgmkj3k5un775nq6q3q7mguv5tvajstmkdsqdja2havq03fqm7Published at
2024-06-14 20:39:42Event JSON
{
"id": "c11706f33981bd9c80dbe85ea99d3b9fa753a0ed2efc4018bb01505bb4dd9b89",
"pubkey": "036533caa872376946d4e4fdea4c1a0441eda38ca2d9d9417bb36006cbaabf58",
"created_at": 1718390382,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"00df28c8b1bef68f0aac7e47476abdd2f8a9a83fcbf61046cb24ea4f5062c8b6",
"wss://nostr.bitcoiner.social/",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"99676ca14f166c09f31367d60716f010b9181f51bc9275ee5f93987dd7bdeb47",
"wss://nostr.bitcoiner.social/",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"5144fe88ff4253c6408ee89ce7fae6f501d84599bc5bd14014d08e489587d5af",
"",
"mention"
]
],
"content": "Just something to think about is all. I don't want to pressure you into OSS, I do think closed source can be necessary in some cases. Specifically for nostr, I think many of us come here expecting to escape the requirement to blindly trust the product and its developers. I trust many of us here to be morally aligned but that can be quite naive. \n\nI personally prefer copy-left. Many prefer completely permissive licensing. For code that produces a product, I would personally (and usually do for my own code) choose the GPLv2+ or AGPLv3+. Both areGNU copy-left license. \n\nIt requires anyone who uses your code build their own product to release your source (or their modified source) publicly. Damus is GPL I believe and its looks like Amethyst is MIT. AGPL has the requirement for server usage. That is if your code sits behind a production application but is not public facing, if changes were made, your code must be made available (with your name on it!) both modified AND your original source code. \n\nThere are other more and less permissive licenses out there, but I appreciate the history of GNU and FSF defending developers using their licenses. \n\nIt's probably going to take a while to choose a license you like, but it's meant to protect you AND your users/community. \n\nI may be on the extreme side, I won't lie, I like owning my code, and having my name displayed because I'm proud and have an ego, but I highly respect my user's rights, so once my code hits a user's hands, its theirs to do what they want with it. Free and always available as long as I'm working on it. That's why I use copy-left.",
"sig": "18b5cb9fbf5439cb109c05ea1918dd2e96957b0eb1507467afd901c22618ab06e808b113d4c2655db831926c5c3b66594b75d8a1bea1560791d75b2aee38cb01"
}