^ I thought I saw that somewhere when I got into the whole licensing bit. I use CC for my writing, but that's what got me started looking at licensing my software. But looking into it, other than Renegade's and 40s suggestions, there doesn't seem to be much help for people who don't want to release the source.
And the reasons for not releasing the source are valid:
1. A lot of the source is derived from code for other people that I maintain the rights to use- but not distribute.
2. Other source is just not compatible with OSS, i.e. commercial components.
3. I've had experiences with OSS that I don't want to repeat- it's just easier to not deal with it, especially for something that I'm not looking to derive compensation from.
But people are so focused on OSS that they forget about people who just want to release free stuff. IMO, the Free Software Definition
shouldn't be synonymous with OSS. But it seems to be. Just because you can't tinker with use the source, doesn't make the software not free.
But that's a different rant...