I generally don't like "viral" license that restrict software use, but I keep thinking about what a "cooperative" software license would look like. Would it restrict use to only members and other software being developed according to the statement on cooperative identity? What about non-profits that aren't operated cooperatively? Would it use some legal definition of "cooperative software" or co-ops as a business vehicle (in places where there is such a thing)?
Maybe it would be deliberately vague. Like it's just a BSD style license except it has an extra clause that says "Commercial use by for-profit entities is forbidden except by members of the cooperative as defined in the bylaws." Then you can specify that contributors are members automatically, other co-ops can become a member for free at the discretion of the co-op, or anyone can buy in. Or maybe it's best to let other cooperative software use it without becoming a member first.
A few more thoughts this mroning:
- It would not meet the OSIs definition of Open Source (but it's the same for non-commercial use and who put OSI in charge of words anyways?)
- Unlike using AGPL and selling exceptions this doesn't make it unusable by people who don't want to re-license their project
- It has an issue where if someone else uses your software non-commercially then someone uses their software commercially they miss that yours is buried in the dependency chain
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!