HI,

While not a detailed discussion of FOSS licensing, there are lots of interesting bits in this Strange Loop 2022 talk.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9IqwIovdiA&list=PLcGKfGEEONaDO2dvGEdodnqG5cSnZ96W1&index=16

"Remember When We Broke the Internet?" by Julia Ferraioli and Amanda Casari (Strange Loop 2022)


Lots of places have dual licensing arrangements where the OSI version is free, but if you want or need support or extra (nice) features you pay.

https://posit.co (RStudio renamed themselves, Never a good sign.)
Labkey with a .org for the free version and a .com for the not free version.

If what you want is just to let people use your code freely then 

CC BY-NC-ND 4.0CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

Name: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License
Abbrev: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
FSF: non_free (https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#CC-BY-NC)
URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
FOSS: no
Extensible: yes
Restricts_use: yes
might cover what you want.

More, way way more examples, on the R Licensing page.

https://svn.r-project.org/R/trunk/share/licenses/license.db

Another example is 

https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/7687/what-non-commercial-license-is-that

which is a somewhat typical license that comes out of an European University.

This is a very deep subject that burns infinite time.  Non-commercial is a bit vague.  I work for a big company but we do basic research.  Is that commercial?  Or no?  *I* have taken the position that it is commercial, but, others do not.

cheers

bruce


On 2022-12-26T10:09:31.000+01:00, rabbit <rabbit@callistohouse.org> wrote:
Thank you. Yes, indeed. Thatโ€™s fine, a non-free license that allows free-use under conditions is fine. Do you know of such a license? ๐Ÿฐ

โ€ขโ€ขโ€ข
๐™„๐™› ๐™ฎ๐™ค๐™ช ๐™–๐™ง๐™š ๐™™๐™ง๐™ž๐™ซ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™œ ๐™– ๐™‹๐™ค๐™ง๐™จ๐™˜๐™๐™š, ๐™ฉ๐™๐™–๐™ฃ๐™  ๐™ฎ๐™ค๐™ช ๐™›๐™ค๐™ง 
๐™ข๐™ค๐™ซ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™œ ๐™ค๐™ซ๐™š๐™ง, ๐™จ๐™ค ๐™ฉ๐™๐™–๐™ฉ ๐™„ ๐™˜๐™ค๐™ช๐™ก๐™™ ๐™จ๐™–๐™›๐™š๐™ก๐™ฎ ๐™ฅ๐™–๐™จ๐™จ! 
Arrivederci, rabbit โ€ข D๐™–๐™ฉ๐™จ๐™ช๐™ฃ ๐Ÿฎ๐Ÿฐ๐Ÿฌ๐™• โ€ข ๐Ÿฐ

On Dec 26, 2022, at 04:01, David O'Toole <deeteeoh1138@gmail.com> wrote:


๏ปฟ
I think the Free Software definition requires that the user have the freedom to use the software for any purpose, including commercial. I am not a lawyer, but I have understood this to imply that restricting commercial use would make the license a non-Free one.

On Sun, Dec 25, 2022 at 11:31 PM rabbit <rabbit@callistohouse.org> wrote:
I am unfamiliar with FOSS licensing. Does anyone know about an open source license that allows free use for free software, but requires payment if its uses are for commercial software?

โ€ขโ€ขโ€ข
๐™„๐™› ๐™ฎ๐™ค๐™ช ๐™–๐™ง๐™š ๐™™๐™ง๐™ž๐™ซ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™œ ๐™– ๐™‹๐™ค๐™ง๐™จ๐™˜๐™๐™š, ๐™ฉ๐™๐™–๐™ฃ๐™  ๐™ฎ๐™ค๐™ช ๐™›๐™ค๐™ง 
๐™ข๐™ค๐™ซ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™œ ๐™ค๐™ซ๐™š๐™ง, ๐™จ๐™ค ๐™ฉ๐™๐™–๐™ฉ ๐™„ ๐™˜๐™ค๐™ช๐™ก๐™™ ๐™จ๐™–๐™›๐™š๐™ก๐™ฎ ๐™ฅ๐™–๐™จ๐™จ! 
Arrivederci, rabbit โ€ข D๐™–๐™ฉ๐™จ๐™ช๐™ฃ ๐Ÿฎ๐Ÿฐ๐Ÿฌ๐™• โ€ข ๐Ÿฐ