And as you can see by the downvotes, people are even ignorant of the fact that e.g. the bill of rights doesn't apply to people outside of the US. Which means no one in the US will even fight for you, which is even worse. This is exactly what you see happening today with the large tech companies where people working there are ignorant of effect of their own actions. The US already wire tapped much of the EUs financial transactions. Which they could do because it simply wasn't illegal by US law.
"It's also worth noting that as long as the agencies are focusing their activities on the actions of foreigners then there's not even anything illegal happening by our domestic laws."
The US doesn't really have a working legal system for things happening outside its borders. In fact as a non US citizen outside the US you don't have much protection at all.
While the barrier to entry is low, that isn't what makes the difference. Sports is also easy to get into, but once you become good you can charge for your performance. When amateurism was enforced in sports only the rich and their associates could be athletes. That is the case if you go back a hundred years. Since open source doesn't de facto allow you control the right to your work, it is close to amateurism for the creator.
People here are saying that this "Common Clause" is just another proprietary license. But from what I gather this isn't the case. What "Common Clause" does is enforce amateurism for not just creators, but for all licensees. As long as you are an amateur you can enjoy open source conditions, but anyone can't charge for your effort. Not only is this more in line with the spirit of amateurism, but it also enables developers to go professional without being strictly proprietary.
I can't tell if this license is a good idea. I do see some problems with it. But I do think things have to change in general. Software development is a professional industry today. Many people cannot afford to work on open source. The whole situation starts to remind me of the "sharing" economy. Where large companies and their associates makes all the money why the the ones doing the work are expected to do so at cost.
Maybe the most disappointing is how threatened people seem to be by change. While at the same time accepting how the large companies behave. I do think that suggest that there is something rotten in the state of open source. At least for me the important part was the creating and the sharing itself. Not under what license that happened. People do realize that they are paying for proprietary licensing all the time and that a lot of their $3k laptop is de facto licensing?
"It's also worth noting that as long as the agencies are focusing their activities on the actions of foreigners then there's not even anything illegal happening by our domestic laws."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/09/15/how-exce...