Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What
Aligns the Constitution's license clause (section 2.8) with the Apache 2.0 license already applied to this repo (LICENSE file present since Feb 2026). Bumps the Constitution to v1.9 with a changelog entry.
Why
The old clause said license selection "will favor copyleft (AGPL, BSL, or similar)." That contradicts both (a) the LICENSE actually in the repo (Apache 2.0) and (b) section 2.8's own reasoning ("secrecy provides no durable moat"; "Zivtech's competitive advantage is not the source code"). This change makes section 2.8 internally consistent.
Rationale for permissive over copyleft: the moat is proprietary add-ons plus ease of adoption and operations, not a license wall; and license-as-moat is increasingly porous in an age of agents. Decision recorded in joyus-ai-internal: planning/free-as-in-freedom-pricing-2026-06-14.md.
Scope / follow-up
This PR changes the license clause only. A broader follow-up (tracked with the add-on architecture work) should widen section 2.8 / section 8 to acknowledge additive, non-crippleware proprietary add-ons as a revenue line, since the current wording frames proprietary value as "skills and knowledge, not code."
Note
The unsent nate-b-jones outreach one-pager also referenced copyleft but was never sent; it is a relic, not a commitment.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code