We don't need yet another license, especially not a use license. Just use a GPL, the version (LGPL, GPL, or AGPL) depending on what you are concerned with.
> Open source has been weaponized against us.
This was always going to be the case. We Free Software advocates have been saying this for decades.
And you're not even to the most important part: this isn't about you, me, or megacorps. It's about users.
Getting someone who worked on the thing or someone close to the author to be hired by your company and bumped to a high prestige position probably has more effect on law than a license (just an intuition).
"Hey, that guy worked with the author, and he was hired and now is a super top dog there... he must be the true genius behind it"
I mean that for ideas, not materialized code. You guys are so focused on small text files and miss the big picture sometimes.
The WRT54g led to a variety of user-serviceable firmware worldwide, including dd-wrt and openwrt. It gave, and continues to give, new life to otherwise wifi devices that shipped with a abandoned propeietary software. It was a revolution in wifi router firmware, and still is.
It was created because Linksys shipped GPL code to customers but didn't provide the source.
My work is with DSLs: ___domain specific languages. The work is in the idea realm (most of the time is spent there), not the source code implementation, which is often trivial once the language is developed.
The gratification also is different. Seeing others use the language is the best one can hope to achieve nowadays. Maybe publish a book about it, but that sounds more trouble than it is worth (judging by how books on patterns, a similar realm, are often misquoted and misused).
That's why all this talk about licenses sounds like nonsense.
Ideas are not copyrightable, so you can't prevent anyone from using them without keeping them secret, and even then folks might come up with the same idea independently.
True, although software patents aren't supposed to be a thing in some places, so your success in protecting software ideas might be ___location dependent, or time dependent as case law changes. Thats probably why I forgot about them.
> Open source has been weaponized against us.
This was always going to be the case. We Free Software advocates have been saying this for decades.
And you're not even to the most important part: this isn't about you, me, or megacorps. It's about users.