Nostr Web Client

Respectfully, I don't think you're being fair here. That's not a steel man.

The site you linked to make your case that the license is "not within the realm of open-source in any way" is really helpful and worth a read if people actually want to "DYOR" as you suggest: https://commonsclause.com/

I'm a layman, but for the most part this seems extremely permissive. Like 95% of maximum open source.

For example, here it indicates that you can build on top of it and sell your software. To claim this is harmful is an extraordinary claim which you don't seem justified to make:

**May I create, distribute, offer as SaaS, and/or “sell” my products using Commons Clause licensed components?**

Yes!

Commons Clause only forbids you from “selling” the Commons Clause software itself. You may develop on top of Commons Clause licensed software (adding applications, tools, utilities or plug-ins) and you may embed and redistribute Commons Clause software in a larger product, and you may distribute and even “sell” (which includes offering as a commercial SaaS service) your product. You may even provide consulting services (see clarifying discussion here). You just can’t sell a product that consists in substance of the Commons Clause software and does not add value.

Naruto 2y ago

That last paragraph looks ripe for lawyers to sort out and suck more money up out of free enterprise.

Even though Foundation forked from the permissively licensed code, NVK and co still continue to launch plenty of accusations Foundation was/is a re-skin of Coldcard with no substantial changes to the code, which isn't the case.

It is clear NVK's choice of this license had 1 goal: prevent Foundation from building on the code.

This decision was and continues to be bad for the Bitcoin space and antithetical to FOSS principles that led to Bitcoin in the first place.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Gunson 2y ago

Seems like Foundation benefits substantially already from Coinkite's work, and continue to do so. Probably wouldn't exist at all without Coinkite.

License clearly allows them to build on top of Coldcard firmware, so long as they are also adding value. It's disingenuous to claim it's not in the realm of open source, because it obviously is.

If I were to **actually** steel man the probable logic for Coinkite's decision its that they wanted to contribute their code and let it be scrutinized, but they wanted some assurance against a much bigger and better capitalized manufacturer doing a full clone (or even many smaller ones cloning and distributing on Amazon potentially putting users at risk).

I doubt there would be any issue with other firms producing products with improvements or different security models. Just seems like a personal issue between Foundation and Coinkite, and Seth is pressing it as a negative marketing campaign which just fuels the fire.

I thought Foundation devices looked interesting and I was open to buying one, but this marketing approach has left a sour taste. Probably won't ever buy from them now, but good luck to you all 🏳️

Naruto 2y ago

First paragraph, yes foundation forked from coldcard and have always made this clear. Just like coldcard forked from trezor.

The MIT commons clause license website faq explicitly states it shouldn't be considered open source.

Sounds like you're running with incomplete information and ignoring the facts on the ground.

I don't give a shit what product you use. Have fun.