Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision
Your text
Line 1:
Line 1:
== Sentence on licences not quite clear ==
<blockquote>Open-source works best when it's paired with a strong copyright license that ensures that no one can take full ownership of it.</blockquote>
"strong copyright license" to ensure that "no one can take full ownership" sounds a bit contradictory to me.
I would try to make a bit more explicit what the problem is, e. g. for-profit companies profiting from the unpaid work of contributors to open source projects without giving anything back/helping to maintain the project.
Why should we want to ensure "that no one can take full ownership"? Is the general issue with ownership not that it allows people to exclude others (for example in the case of land or housing, that may go unused due to property laws, but also goods that would not need to be scarce like digital goods).
--[[User:Qv1et|Qv1et]] ([[User talk:Qv1et|talk]]) 12:49, 14 July 2025 (UTC)