@pojntfx@mastodon.social
Charm's Crush project might have had the fastest MIT → Introduces CLA → Rugpulls everyone I've seen so far
Not the CLA itself, they immediately used the CLA to make it proprietary (it's FSL now)
Aaaah. I was looking at their LICENSE but it seemed like it had always been FSL.
I browsed the repo from the Github app on my phone, but the rename of LICENSE -> LICENSE.md hid part of the history.
Am on desktop now, here's where that happened
https://github.com/charmbracelet/crush/commit/2562b0dc79221a85c5e637d0a003a2b3ba656644
Anyway I have been a licensing nerd for... way too long.
"Never sign a CLA" is going a bit too far IMO.
1) Even under the best circumstances, the publishing org needs the ability to relicense. (Though one should have restrictions on future licenses).
2) While this is an obvious move to make themselves more investable by enclosing the commons they built... it's also true that traditional open source has been pwned by big companies as well. IDK what the answer is for innovators
I don't think a publishing org should have the ability to relicense without my consent and explicit permission.
CC: @[email protected]
I understand this is not a simple issue, but consider a similar case
When Wikipedia was created, it used the best license available, the GNU Free Documentation License, originally designed to apply to the docs that accompany software. It was a bad fit for educational content, and Creative Commons was much better.
It’s a long story but the project was able to switch licenses without getting the explicit assent of tens of thousands of contributors because it allowed for license upgrades.
Licenses rot just like software. The wording is inadequate for future needs of the project. If you only want to contribute to projects that say they will never change their licenses, that’s your right, but you’re sort of ensuring their untimely death
Now, democratic processes have a role here. When Wikipedia did its license transition, it required the assent of the original license publisher (GNU) and a serious attempt was made to poll contributors.
