i'm sympathetic to (and in the same boat) as the developers that are considering "licenses" like this one. but i agree with the author that the language being used is fraudulent and the terms are one-sided (hence the quotes). i've made an attempt at coming up with a license that better bridges the gap between open and closed. my goals were:

* pay to use the software * assure developers that they can also monetize their work * assure users that prices won't change unpredictably

https://github.com/db4j/pupl/blob/master/PUPL.md

would love any feedback or alternative licenses that capture similar elements