i believe Sahil mentioned they’re moving away from Rails soon, as he sees it as technical debt.

For what it's worth Gumroad left VC land several years ago.

https://sahillavingia.com/reflecting

Most of the VC open-source projects use open-source as a lead magnet/marketing tactic only, with no intention or desire of wanting people to actually use the software.

> Why the fuck is everyone in VC land trying to change the true definition of open source?

They want the marketing benefits without the costs.

    The licensor grants you a copyright license for the software to do everything you might do with the software that would otherwise infringe the licensor's copyright, but only as long as you meet all the conditions below.

Am I going insane, or is there a reading of this that seems to imply you can use the software, to infringe on ANY work Gumroad has created? "...grants you a copyright license for the software" seems to imply it's talking about this software license only, but the second part mentions "licensor's copyright" which seems to not be defined, nor bounded. There's no mention of a copyright *for the software*... just the copyright license to use the software that allows you to infringe all copyrights from Gumroad.

I think they probably meant

    The licensor grants you a copyright license for the software to do everything you might do with the software that would otherwise infringe the licensor's copyright [to the software], but only as long as you meet all the conditions below.

I wonder if you can just reuse text or images from their corporate website as long as you personally make less than 1M$ a year, use their software and don't infringe their trademarks.

Awful license on multiple levels.

I think this reaction is misdirected. Yes, the license is restrictive, but Gumroad doesn't seem to be claiming themselves that the code is open source. I think OP made a mistake out of ignorance and said that it was open source.

Which is super bullshit; cause now offering open source solutions many folk see it as a trick!

The definition of open source is itself a corruption of free software which came before it, and was corrupted by the same people.

It's a careless and sloppy marketing job by someone who wants to reframe the definition of open source for the millionth time, unfortunately.

If you do it right, no one will know.

They've also bumped up their fees enormously, it's 10% + processing fee now, previously it was $1 flat + processing.

Here I was thinking it was the subreddit

it's basicly free development