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.

top 6 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] limerod@reddthat.com 14 points 1 month ago

This is diluting the Foss moment more than others. GPL and AGPL are more than sufficient in my opinion.

[–] RavuAlHemio@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

To my knowledge, there has been some discussion regarding the AGPL as to whether using software through a network even creates the kind of legal relationship between provider and client such that the client has standing to request the source code. I assume similar discussions would crop up regarding the SOWPL.

[–] beyond@linkage.ds8.zone 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month 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.

[–] myself@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago

"Hey dude are you running a SOWsense router in your homelab?"

"No I just wrote something from scratch"

"ah ok"

[–] moonpiedumplings@programming.dev 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

No, because it has a "termination clause", where if Watcom is suing you you can't use the software anymore while you are

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sybase_Open_Watcom_Public_License

See the first bit, and the linked discussion by Debian developers.

[–] HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org 1 points 4 weeks ago

My question is, what would happen if free and/or open source software had the SOWPL?

For existing projects, that would only be possible if all contributors would agree to re-license their code. And unless there are compelling advantages for every one to do that, this is not going to happen.