> - Put an expiration date on the storefront and make it clear that your software is not guaranteed to continue working after date X.
This software is not guaranteed beyond 0 Unix time.
> - Have your server source code (stripped down of proprietary stuff) ready for public release at EoL.
This isn't viable, and i would expect anyone on this site to understand that. it's roughly equivalent to saying "just make facebook stripped of proprietary code and ready for the public to run"
> - Allow customers to reverse engineer the binaries and communication protocol after EoL.
This is a reasonable path forward, but likely a non-starter in the US for political reasons. I understand that "stop killing games" is an EU thing.
> - Package dedicated server binaries with the game and allow customers to connect to it via a LAN or direct IP option.
Better to say Apple failed to lose. The court explicitly left open the question as to whether they are a monopoly. They just didn't provide any meaningful injunctions as a result of that case.
Apple wasn't ruled not a monopoly. It was ruled that the evidence Epic brought in the case was insufficient to show Apple was a monopoly, and the court would entertain other arguments in the future.
Apple didn't need to do anything, but they didn't "win" that convincingly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrepreneurship
> An entrepreneur (French: [ɑ̃tʁəpʁənœʁ]) is an individual who creates and/or invests in one or more businesses, bearing most of the risks and enjoying most of the rewards.
nothing there precludes even microbusinesses. and nothing requires taking VC or having employees.
no, it's a failed concept. frequently you'll find effectively shell scripts that couple workflows to some graphical environment for spurious reasons -- except they're baked with bad assumptions about state in that environment as outlined in the article.
if you want knuth's literate programming, just comment liberally per that guidance.
or carry forward with them and print your retractions later. vOv