You're not the only one my friend. 

This is my personal opinion: If your application's value is dependent on it's it's ability to protect its source code, then it's not actually a valuable product. 

What I mean to say is, how does "protecting" your source code generate or hold on to revenue? Because its perceived as something you can sell? As in, no other entity can "steal" or recreate your idea from all of your effort in building your code base? Furthermore nostr and arguably most of us devs believe in a world where the developer's brain and ability to ship a product far outweigh the value in existing source code. 

Many commercial or enterprise products (think of linux distros) are 100million dollar businesses building open source products. Beyond that the likelihood your product is going to compete directly with a fork of itself is arguably none depending on your licensing strategy, because they don't have you and your vision. And even further if you're worried about a fork competition, you are already in competition with other similar applications. This is where licensing choices weigh heavily. 

nostr:npub1m4ny6hjqzepn4rxknuq94c2gpqzr29ufkkw7ttcxyak7v43n6vvsajc2jl or nostr:npub1wqfzz2p880wq0tumuae9lfwyhs8uz35xd0kr34zrvrwyh3kvrzuskcqsyn would you have any more thoughs here?