Sentry's Open Source Values

One thing they never acknowledge is that all of the FSF's software licenses specifically focus on allowing commercial use by companies, and have led to strictly not calling licenses with such exclusions "free".

So I think it's unfair to consider them against companies, which this article makes a play at.

But it is true that we are missing some type of protection/encouragement for companies investing in developing free software. Even FSF attempted to fix that (even while mainly thinking of users) with AGPL.

> we reject both open core and copyleft, because in our view they both overly restrict access to tech and knowledge.

If that's really the only reason they rejected copyleft, then they could dual-license all of their stuff, either under a truly FOSS copyleft license or the non-free but eventually-permissive thing they use exclusively today.