feels like the conflation of "free open-source software" in the Stallman sense with "nonfree open-source software" muddies up all of these discussions/judgements on how software should run<p>nonfree open-source software offers the right to repair, a promise that the code you use will be free forever, and the right to inspect (security/functionality). for some developers those rights + promises are enough.<p>the author places common business models at odds with "OS philosopy"...not sure that's true. at odds with Stallman's definition of free software which has some pretty aggressive moral tilt ( <a href="https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/is-ever-good-use-nonfree-program.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/is-ever-good-use-nonfree-prog...</a> ) ...but outside of that, I think most of these business models are actually Just Fine.
Fascinating topic, awesome seeing how people are thinking about it!<p>I found the article a little hand-wavey though, would love to hear more about the short comings of dual-licenses