I have been looking at the Commons Clause License again, after reading how open licensing blew its biggest opportunity of the 2010s linked from an opinion piece crossposted from this forum.
I really like the idea of license ‘patches’, and I am sure I have come across an online tool where you can select the clauses you want for a license and curate them together to make a customized license but I can’t find the link.
Anyway, I don’t know much about European law and even less about US law but what I do know is that agreeing not to compete with someone is an exenmplary case of a business cartel, which AFAIK is illegal in most european states.
As such, this clause feels as if it is motivated by an anti-competitive sentiment.
Now, I am the last person on earth to defend the ‘principles’ of the free market, and while my interpretation is highly speculative, the ‘cartel’ aspect of this clause I think may be a problem / oversight?
Even if it checks out legally for US developers, it’s certainly a misnomer/euphemism to call this clause a ‘commons’ clause… because I don’t see it as servicing the needs of a commons-based system. It seems squarely to meet the needs of the producers who sign up for it, and since these entities are likely to be firms, calling this a ‘Cartel Clause’ I don’t think is being too dramatic?