Thanks for the clarification, Daniel. I think I understand your position now. You want to be able to license your work — I will call it the Ascraeus License for shorthand — for use by any natural person or organization in such a way that they derive no financial gain from your work. I agree that there are versions of the Creative Commons License that meet that requirement.
There is no dichotomy. I am not defending FOSS or any other licensing scheme. But your seems rant again FOSS licenses makes no sense to me given that the license is being used EXACTLY as intended. The license was intentionally designed to prevent restrictions on usage. Just like freedom of speech.
WIth my examples, I was trying to get at the idea that your work could be used in a way that indirectly produces financial gain, but my examples were poor.
In the second circumstance, if the theoretical “poor person” is replaced with a collective or a mutual aid organisation, then I want that collective to be free to derive use from my works.
You mentioned CC-BY-NC-SA. Can you clarify why that license doesn’t meet your needs? How would you word the Ascraeus License? What would be the legal rights of the licensee of Ascraeus Licensed works?
I am curious as to how you would word a license to make it clear what type of usage is allowed (“the relatively poor person”) and what isn’t allowed (“a person with relative wealth”).
But I don’t think a new type of license is needed. I think you can get exactly what you want by saying “contact me for licensing terms”. Then you are free to write up any terms you want on an individual basis. That’s what my friend who are professional photographers do. Each usage is on a case by case.
“Making bank” means to make money, get enough to pay your bills or expenses with excess, acquire money etc. or acquiring a significant amount of money in a short time period.