@alex >Is MongoDB's SSPL license really that bad?
Yes.

>I kind of like it.
Of course you would.

>I don't really have a problem with forcing Amazon to open source their SaaS as a contingency of the license. In fact I would prefer it.
No, the SSPL doesn't require that, it doesn't even say "open" in it.

If you want amazon to release their SaaSS modifications as free software for your free software, the AGPLv3-or-later is the license you want.

amazon just stopped using mongodb and wrote their own after it became proprietary.

>But I wish he would remember his youth for a second and then think again.
Same, I wish he would remember his youth and call a proprietary license, a proprietary license without holding back.

"13. Offering the Program as a Service.

If you make the functionality of the Program or a modified version available to third parties as a service, you must make the Service Source Code available via network download to everyone at no charge, under the terms of this License. Making the functionality of the Program or modified version available to third parties as a service includes, without limitation, enabling third parties to interact with the functionality of the Program or modified version remotely through a computer network, offering a service the value of which entirely or primarily derives from the value of the Program or modified version, or offering a service that accomplishes for users the primary purpose of the Program or modified version.

“Service Source Code” means the Corresponding Source for the Program or the modified version, and the Corresponding Source for all programs that you use to make the Program or modified version available as a service, including, without limitation, management software, user interfaces, application program interfaces, automation software, monitoring software, backup software, storage software and hosting software, all such that a user could run an instance of the service using the Service Source Code you make available."

Part of freedom is being able to use software privately (using software as part of SaaSS to do other peoples computing is not private usage) - the SSPL badly violates this principle by demanding that you provide the source code of your own private editor that you've only ever used yourself to edit some config files (or any other kind of software that falls under the broad range of software defined).

@dragestil >Then we can use this proof to prove that sspl has gone too far.
The SSPL isn't written with freedom in mind.

The whole idea of the license is to be impossible to comply with, to allow MongoDB to demand money for exceptions off any business that uses the software.

Previously MongoDB was licensed under the AGPLv3, but too many businesses were just complying with the license terms, or pointed out their existing compliance and telling them to sue if they had a problem, rather than forking over money for a license exception.

In order to resolve these rent-seeking failings, MongoDB added an impossible to comply with proprietary clause to the AGPLv3 and removed the parts about GNU as required and as a result, every attacked business has no choice but to pay the license exception rent.

It saddens me that people can't see through such moderate level of proprietary trick.