Commons Clause
Hi folks.  Kevin from <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;fossa.io" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;fossa.io</a> here.  I worked on bringing the Commons Clause to life (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;commonsclause.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;commonsclause.com&#x2F;</a>) and led many of the project efforts here.<p>Happy to answer questions here (or on Twitter @kevinverse).<p>I wanted to write a blog post to set some context because the real story is a lot less salacious then &quot;Redis just went proprietary&quot;, but here&#x27;s a quick summary:<p>1&#x2F; No, Redis isn&#x27;t proprietary. It&#x27;s only some enterprise modules.  The Commons Clause is mostly used to temporarily transition enterprise offering counterparts of OSS projects to source-available.<p>2&#x2F; OSS projects are mainly funded by some proprietary offering or service on top of it. Anything to help the ability to monetize this layer is really good, as the fate of the project is directly tied to this revenue stream. A quick reminder, companies like Redis sink 10s of millions into RnD and are usually contributing over 99% of the code to these repos.<p>3&#x2F; OSS-savvy companies aren&#x27;t dumb.  They understand the optics of any licensing announcement and carefully consider what it will mean. Before we react, we should push ourselves to understand what systems are forcing deeply passionate OSS devs to consider more proprietary options.