From 90900e2391026d9ab4571e0ee6b8ecb1e55a034f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Chad Whitacre Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 17:28:23 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] Promote "hard to violate" to the Definition --- README.md | 8 +++----- src/pages/about.astro | 8 ++++++++ 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index 5d21450..6b4559a 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -19,8 +19,6 @@ you're using BUSL we will need to review your license more closely since BUSL can have highly variable implementations. For **licenses**, we're still working out specifics but we intend to be fairly -stringent in order to avoid license proliferation. Of course your license must -meet the [Fair Source Definition](https://fair.io/about/). It must also not put -an undue burden on the user to monitor their compliance with your license (any -compliance checks should be built into your software itself). It should also be -adopted at more than one company, at least. +stringent in order to avoid license proliferation. Uour license must meet the +[Fair Source Definition](https://fair.io/about/), and it should be adopted at +more than one company, at least. diff --git a/src/pages/about.astro b/src/pages/about.astro index 83f77b0..72e1e5a 100644 --- a/src/pages/about.astro +++ b/src/pages/about.astro @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ const heroData = { to protect the producer’s business model; and
  • undergoes delayed Open Source publication (DOSP).
  • +
  • does not put an undue burden on the user to monitor their compliance.
  • @@ -100,6 +101,13 @@ const heroData = { Will this be meaningful in practice? Again, time will tell.

    +

    + The fourth point is that Fair Source software must not put an undue + burden on the user to monitor their compliance with the license. + For the most part, compliance checks should be built into the software + itself. It should be difficult to violate the license terms. +

    +

    Why Fair Source?