Related:

'Source available' is not open source (and that's okay)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46213709

I can't think of two less qualified people to have a beef over this.

Though to be fair, DHH actually creating a new license that lets people run it and modify it for free but also reserving monetization rights is at least honest and ostensibly solves the problem both of them care about.

Mullenweg running a shady copyright shakedown scheme to monetize his "open source" project strikes me as much, much worse. Claiming you are the "democratic, freedom" option when you're actually running a mafia secret police seems very dishonest.

> DHH is free to describe his proprietary software as Open Source, a form of greenwashing, and even though he wants to “Well akshually” denigrate those saying why this is BS, we as free citizens are free to explain why, despite how fast he talks and confident he sounds, he’s not always right.