• souperk@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    My understanding is that the company would be regulated by CRA and not the developer. However, that does not stop the company from pushing the developer for CRA compliance.

    • Rogue@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      That’s actually pretty reasonable. I’d be happy to make my open source projects compliant for a company - but they can damn well pay me for the effort.

        • Rogue@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Indeed, that’s why I use the AGPL license. Corporations hate it because it forces them to give back.

          • logging_strict@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            it's free as in go pound sand if you aren't going to fund maintainers

            it doesn’t force them to do anything until devs refuse to work for any company that doesn’t.

            i’m with you on agplv3+. The copyright recognition document comes before the resume.