'Fair-License' - The only License, to:

• ... [✔] cover open contributors & open economic sustainability.
• ... [✔] allow non-commercial repurposing & same-purpose distribution, without allowing commercial exploitation, without requiring license-virality. ( Alternative to prevent commercial exploitation: "Dual licensing", such as "GNU for everything, except for commerce" )

This draft attempts to explain to every reader and be legally precise-enough too.
Talk to us? ☺ Are you into international law?

FREEDOMS:

• PERSONAL PRIVATE USE: This work was made for you ♡ (If you like, consider donating or investing and we consider passing it on.)
  • Please vote about our future actions (Undefined method such as user-accounts, universal cryptographic key pairs or national ID)
  • If you ever change or repurpose our work for personal use, please still just consider to show us your result or process ♡
• CONTRIBUTORS: (Unlike popular licences,) we acknowledge, that you become an intellectual shareholder of this project or cooperative (or Token or DAO or publicly traded company), proportionally to your time well-spent. (By Quantity.) (And by Quality as reasonably definitely measureable). - Please vote about our future actions.
• DISTRIBUTIORS: Unmodified pupblishing of our official releases is permitted by default.
  • Don't sell our work or wrap it in ads or drive-by installs.
  • Same purpose: Additions are allowed when optional, free and non-commercial. (You can add a (sub-)feature and show your credits, when a user voluntarily selects that feature.)
  • Technically required changes for other OS's and environments are allowed.
• REPURPOSING:
  • Tax-exempt non-profit charity organisations: You can modify and repurpose. Just don't remove our links and credits and let clear who made what.

RESTRICTION:

• COMMERCIALLY REPURPOSING any of the code in any way.
  • Written permission/contract is required. (All granted Licenses are published at https://github.com/_/_/Licenses-granted.md)

---

This license must be included with every piece of our work and refers to the original project: https://github.com/_/_ specifically.
(There is no License-virality. This License needs not to refer to your addition or modification)

---

COMMENT / POSTAMBLE:

"WHY RESTRICT COMMERCIAL USE?"

• That's just like asking: "Why tax commercial companies?" "Why does society believe more in public goods?"
  • "Commercial" is always taxed (essentially defined through it's restriction. Obviously, if every business would be a non-profit, then tax would not even exist.)
• Open developers and public goods need not be underpaid or paid uncertainly. They need not force themselves to drain their productivity and hardly keep up, even when chosing worthy causes.
  • One can decide per case, when to sell commercial licenses or not. To set certain moral requirements and avoid exploitation, selling subscriptions only, but not unconditional or permanent licenses
• "Restricting commercial-use" is simply closest to a legally implemented version of: "Restricting greedy/extractive/exploitative use".
• Non-profit work can increase when not disadvantaged. (And non-profits might eventually / increasingly receive some fair minus-tax in future)
• "WILL RESTRICTING COMMERCIAL-USE SLOW DOWN DEVELOPMENT?"
  • Legal commercial work is prepared for paperworks. (Which becomes easier through automation, decentralization)
  • For many complex and specific projects, we can't imagine, that requiring to ask first will hinder many good causes. (While asking might help to connect, motivate or inspire each other).

"NO LICENSE-VIRALITY?"

• Virality just means: Exponential growth indicator. Forcing viral development sounds supportive but not all open software needs or deserves the same strategy
• Current implementations, unnecessarily allow commercial exploitation permanently and without requiring to add anything.
  • Some publishers use works to add adware or spyware
    • Such versions can exceed the distribution of the originals. ( Visibility might not be balanced or fair yet and billions of users might not review every software they chose. Thus authors should care? Or at least not even give viral ownership to everybody.)
      • ( Caring for that does not contradict the overally hope or tendency for more efficient and friendly behavior to grow more virally eventually )
• ( There is no one-fit-all required. You can consider to release your work under multiple licenses and add exceptions )