问HN：许可证能否促使大型企业回馈社会？
我对这篇文章的接受度没有任何期待，因为它对开源持有“过于纯粹”的看法。然而，除非我们在没有附加条件的开源之外有所进步，否则这个生态系统将继续保持现状，依然破碎。为什么我们那些超负荷工作、薪水微薄的开源开发者不为他们的软件设定一个类似于“如果你赚超过1,000,000美元，就给我付费”的许可呢？JSON 的设计者（“那个” JSON）道格拉斯·克罗克福德曾让IBM请求使用JSLint的许可，因为道格拉斯在其中添加了“软件应当用于善，而非恶”的注释/条款。[1]
我们不知道GPL在法庭上是否有效。不过，似乎你在许可中写的任何内容都能起到一定的威慑作用。因此，你的代码库可以采用现有的宽松许可，比如MIT，并添加我提到的条款。为他人商业使用你的开源项目设定一个程序。例如，大时间公共许可证就是一个这样的例子。[2]
[1] https://wonko.com/post/jsmin-isnt-welcome-on-google-code/
[2] https://bigtimelicense.com/versions/2.0.2#big-business
查看原文
I've no expectations for this post to be well-received because it looks down on open-source for being too "pure". Though unless we evolve beyond no-strings-attached open-source, the ecosystem will remain as broken as it is. Why don't our overworked, underpaid open-source developers license their software with something to the effect of "If you make more than $1,000,000, pay me."? JSON designer ("the" JSON) Douglas Crockford had IBM ask for permission to use JSLint, because Douglas had added the note/clause/term "The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil."[1]<p>We don't know if GPL works in court. It roughly seems like whatever you write in a license is an effective deterrent though. So your repository could take an existing permissive license like MIT, and add a clause like I mentioned. Set a procedure for your terms for others to use your open-source project commercially. An example of this is the Big Time Public License.[2]<p>[1] https://wonko.com/post/jsmin-isnt-welcome-on-google-code/<p>[2] https://bigtimelicense.com/versions/2.0.2#big-business