If your SaaS can’t compete on the service part, the software part ain’t gonna make or break you.
No the problem is that it cant compete on the hardware part sometimes
Lets face it even if it something is open source, chances are that the most contributions/time are still spent by the person making it or the saas provider in this industry.
Imagine that someone goes ahead and launches a cheaper version of their saas and people go use that, since that person isnt having his time invested in the software as much as the original person and thus is willing to undercut him because his investment/returns expectations are very minimal whereas for the original saas it can be very high (writing good quality software which costs some developers real time and even real money)
This shows that, Companies shouldn't create open source software itself if people have such mindset since creating open source software/software in general takes sometime and it sucks if I create something, then someone grabs it and undercuts me.
This is the reason why people create source available licenses/use them. Time to create software isnt free in my opinion and we shouldnt treat it as such
Plus, what I am saying is that these licenses dont allow you to not self host, they allow you to self host, they are basically like MIT except with one clause that doesnt allow the vps providers/datacenters/other companies to compete directly against you.
Its the best of both worlds in a way.
You get money which can allow you to work full time on the project
Most people can audit the code/still run it locally/on their own VPS
People who want to rent your open source software basically by having infrastructure/undercutting you etc. actively harming you and both the community etc. are unable to bypass the intricacies of licenses.
Oh, your bootstrapped team can’t simultaneously develop from scratch and support the new open source software project AND outcompete a multi-billion dollar business who decided to offer your service as a below-cost addon to their offering used by millions of people on day one? Tough luck, greedy bastard, you should have stayed in your cubicle.
Entitlement is when you expect that OSS contributors must provide you with a warranty or a certain feature you need for your business activity. They are not.
This is an incredibly misleading comparison. The subsequent clause is a complete contradiction, not a subtle clarification.
I am fine with licensing your code as you wish, but I will always oppose attempts to redefine the widely understood and established meaning of "open source" that has been in place for over 30 years. You don't get to change its definition.
Please don't embarrass yourself with your conspiracy theory nonsense. Besides that, Microsoft contributed to Open Source more than any other company.