@SaeranVasanthakumar, thank you for your kind comments. This is a very good question which has a very long answer which I will most likely write about with more details in the near future. I try to keep it short here and still answer your question.
The short answer is because it’s not as simple as putting a number on the tools and if not done correctly it can hurt the project and our community.
This has been an on-going challenge for open-source projects and open-source companies to be successful in business while staying open-source. […they have tried several approached including what you suggested which I keep them to be discussed in a separate writing and for now jump to the latest one…]. Most recently there has been a wave of open-source companies like MongoDB and RedisLab who started to come up with new licenses to protect their products against cloud services in their case. They are trying to ensure that the companies who are making money out of their products as a service contribute back while they keep the source code open or as they call it there days source-available. If you are interested in this topic this post on announcing SSPL (Server Side Public License) for MongoDB product is a good starting point.
There have been online discussions on this new approach from both sides. If you want to read only one of them I would recommend this one, and yes I am biased! I personally don’t think using new licenses is necessarily a good approach and it can potentially hurt the project and the community around it. More importantly as John Walker discusses in this article:
“You can’t inject artificial limitations on an open source project and expect it to grow into an ecosystem.”
There is another topic that also needs to be discussed before going for any payment-based approach for Ladybug Tools and that is the difference between a project and a product. It is very challenging to sell a project but you it is a common practice to sell a product. Currently the Ladybug Tools project and the Ladybug Tools plugins (which can be potentially be the products) are deeply intertwined and separating them right now would hurt the project. However the fact that we are currently separating the interface code from core code in the new libraries is a good first step in enabling a future where the community can thrive around an the core open source project but many products that make this core code easier and more reliable to use are also possible.
I have been reading quite a lot on this topic recently and it seems the best approach for us is to develop new products, offer them as paid services and keep Ladybug Tools as a project. The clear line between the two will ensure that the project and the community will not be hurt. That is the last thing that we want to do. And I’m not talking about developing a proprietary product. This product can be open source as long as it provides convenience and reliability which is what you can charge for regardless of being open or closed. There are several companies like that including Discourse itself!
This will ensure that everyone can contribute to Ladybug Tools and create products using Ladybug Tools as long as they comply with the GPL license. Just like how we will be developing our products. Yes, we have to work as twice as everyone else to maintain the project as well as develop our own product but it is worth the effort in the long term.
We are in the process of creating our first new product which is the outcome of the SBIR grant:(http://www.pollination.cloud). That should help us to sustain our business while keeping Ladybug Tools as an on-going fully open-source project.
This is also a great read from the same author on Why Your Open Source Project Is Not A Product.
For good or bad, arguing from the “fairness” point of view has not worked. This article has a good take on why it is better to separate the “fairness” conversation. Not to mention that I share the frustration with you. People and companies should be fair but that’s not how it is. We have to find the right way to do the “gentle push” while staying fair ourselves.
I failed to keep it as short as I wanted it to be but I hope that I have answered your question.