Prior to that date, presumably it would be under some proprietary license, right?
That means two things:
(1) It'll be difficult to manage community changes and proprietary changes (they might even be mutually exclusive or get on different trajectories). Ultimately this model probably means little to no open contribution, little to no community.
(2) There is nothing actually forcing the open source release.
If this is something one is interested in doing, it should be woven into the AOO/AOI/OA/bylaws with an enforcement mechanism. E.g., explicitly acknowledge that the corporation is directed to treat the trust of the open source community as among the highest goods, open source has to happen at a certain interval (you might choose 14 years, modeled after the original copyright term).
You might even create structures to enforce this, e.g., SPI has a board seat with no power except to force a vote on not releasing changes on schedule, and that such a decision requires a 3/4 majority or something.
Comments
Prior to that date, presumably it would be under some proprietary license, right?
That means two things:
(1) It'll be difficult to manage community changes and proprietary changes (they might even be mutually exclusive or get on different trajectories). Ultimately this model probably means little to no open contribution, little to no community.
(2) There is nothing actually forcing the open source release.
If this is something one is interested in doing, it should be woven into the AOO/AOI/OA/bylaws with an enforcement mechanism. E.g., explicitly acknowledge that the corporation is directed to treat the trust of the open source community as among the highest goods, open source has to happen at a certain interval (you might choose 14 years, modeled after the original copyright term).
You might even create structures to enforce this, e.g., SPI has a board seat with no power except to force a vote on not releasing changes on schedule, and that such a decision requires a 3/4 majority or something.
the anti-cloud-use license would include it, with no need of a separate release
What? How exactly would you make that work in practice?
Are you going to release the source on day one?
Because good luck trying to convince the board to pay for source escrow.
And if you don't do any of those things then you will, in fact, need a separate release of source code.
yes, source release on day one, proprietary license valid forever, free license becomes valid after X time and users need to only satisfy one of them.
Many projects already do this; proprietary source does not mean closed source, it can simply be freely available but with no copyright concessions