> shit
It's just a commercial license with very mild terms.
It's just a commercial license with very mild terms.
The source code is fully available, none of the features are paywalled. They only prohibit you from taking their code and reselling it.
If you take a look at the Play Store, there are thousands of instances where open source projects are lazily renamed and sold for $5 or $10. It's the definition of scummy, pathetic, worthless behavior, and I'm glad the license prevents those kinds of leeches from succeeding.
I know this isn't the only case, but it's the majority of cases. So I have no problem with their license at all.
So no, the license doesn't matter.
It might be not a foolproof solution, but I think the license is better than nothing. Then you have a legal precedent that you can cite when you file a lawsuit against these rats.
Most of these people doing this probably aren't in the same country. But whatever. It's better than nothing.
They prohibit you from removing the constant nags about buying a licence.
1. Paying and clicking “I paid”
2. Not paying and still clicking “I paid”
So it’s an honour system right now.
That said, if they ever implement e.g. license keys or some other mean of actually checking that you’ve paid, seems that you would be able to remove it and recompile, you just can’t help others do that:
> Notwithstanding the above, you may not remove or obscure any functionality in the software related to payment to the Licensor in any copy you distribute to others.
(IANAL)
Or you know, also buy the license and click it honestly.