The Open Source Initiative's blog covers open source licensing, community practice, and contribution advice.
HN links it for posts on open source licensing and the cloud copyleft problem; commenters mostly discuss the OSI's role rather than praise the site.
I don't accept that this is OSI's fault thought: It takes two to tango. The OSI has been thinking about a more appropriate format to address the issues of copyleft in the cloud world. I recognize that the problem exists, I wrote about it here: https://opensource.net/lost-decade-crucial-lessons-for-ai/
Frankly speaking, I would love to see also a detailed criticism of the AGPLv3. I would love to have a better understanding of why the SSPL was deemed necessary and what needs the AGPLv3 fails to satisfy... So far, the only explanations I've heard are superficial at best.
You have to also realize that most of these companies are not interested in copyleft or in the values of Open Source to empower users. They're following a very well known path, one that Phipps calls the rights ratchet model. Call it the SugarCRM model, if you prefer: it's a very very predictable pattern, from Open Source to proprietary in about 10 years https://meshedinsights.com/2021/02/02/rights-ratchet/
These are complex matters though and I'm convinced that they cannot be eviscerated properly on a social media, or only on an online forum. We need better ways.
The link should be https://opensource.net. Accidentally added a q to the end of the URL. Can anyone fix this? Thanks!