• rollingflower@lemmy.kde.social
      link
      fedilink
      Deutsch
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      This!!!

      This!!

      People, stop celebrating “freeing” software of maintainers that want to prevent being exploited.

      • qaz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        38
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        What about a license that would require every company with a market cap above 25 B that (indirectly) uses the software to contribute X amount (like $1000 a year) of revenue back?

        • paraphrand@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          27
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          I think if that caught on then companies would call it undue burden to sift through all the dependencies they use to make such small payments.

          It is a difficult problem. But on the face of it your suggestion seems very reasonable.

          • qaz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            GitHub has a tool built-in to show all dependencies, it’s not that hard to write a little script to check the LICENSE files in the repositories. I’m sure one of the biggest companies in the world has the ability to do that.

          • Lmaydev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            If dual licensing was standard the software that uses things like xz would pay down the line so everything was funded.