This license has the peculiarity that any software implementation requires you to offer the source code, even if you only plan to use it privately. This makes it a stronger license than the AGPL in terms of copyleft. If the AGPL already scares away almost all companies, the SOWPL scares away almost everyone.

My question is, what would happen if free and/or open source software had the SOWPL? Would projects have to be forked? Would free and open source software die? Would we have to start from scratch again or hire lawyers to avoid problems?

I would like to know your response to this fictional scenario.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] beyond@linkage.ds8.zone 3 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

Well it wouldn't be free software, because the requirement to publish source code publicly is at odds with the free software definition; the freedom to do something is not an obligation to do it. Copyleft simply means that if you choose to distribute the software, that you must do so under the terms you received it.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#Watcom

But, suppose the free software definition was written with this requirement in mind - as other commenters said it would be untenable, and potentially hazardous if you are using the software in a hostile environment.