Some startups are going ‘fair source’ to avoid the pitfalls of open source licensing

Sentry and others introduce 'fair source' licenses, blending open and proprietary software for better commercial viability.

: Sentry, a $3 billion developer software company, has introduced 'fair source' licenses to balance open and proprietary software needs. This move caters to firms looking to share code while protecting commercial interests. The key fair source licenses include Functional Source License (FSL) and Business Source License (BUSL), both featuring delayed open source publication. Critics argue this adds complexity and legal ambiguity, though supporters believe it offers a practical middle ground.

Sentry, a $3 billion startup, has unveiled a new licensing model known as 'fair source' to bridge the gap between open source and proprietary software. Spearheaded by Sentry's head of open source Chad Whitacre, this initiative aims to enable firms to share code without compromising their commercial interests, addressing the flaws they've observed in open source business models.

The Functional Source License (FSL) and Business Source License (BUSL) are the primary licenses under this new model, featuring a delayed open source publication clause. This delay allows companies to protect their code for a predefined period—two years for FSL and four years for BUSL—before it becomes fully open source. The initiative has already seen early adoption from companies like GitButler, launched by Scott Chacon, one of GitHub's founders.

Critics like Thierry Carrez from the Open Source Initiative express concerns over the potential legal ambiguities and the risk of stifling innovation. Nonetheless, supporters argue that 'fair source' presents a viable pathway for companies wary of the long-term viability of fully open source models. With a governance model still in its infancy, the fair source movement aims to evolve and adapt, promoting a balance between transparency and commercial protection.