... I don't want people to re-use the code/implement the code on separate sites ...
This really misses the point of Free Software, or as the FSF puts it, it's open source but not really Free Software. Despite my tone, I'm not here to lecture you, I'm simply pointing out that people are not likely to help if the project has this kind of restriction.
However, if you change that to:
... I don't want people to re-use the code/implement the code on separate sites without contributing any modifications they make back to the project ...
Then the GNU Affero General Public License might be appropriate; it prevents people from modifying your website unless they publish their changes under the same license.
If you still insist on your original restriction, then no open source license will help you, since most of them are about being Free Software, not just open source. You're going to have to write your own license, or modify an existing one.
发布评论
评论（1）
这确实错过了自由软件的意义，或者正如 FSF 所说，它是 开源但不是真正的自由软件。不管我的语气如何，我并不是来教训你的，我只是指出，如果项目有这种限制，人们不太可能提供帮助。
但是，如果您将其更改为：
然后GNU Affero 通用公共许可证 可能比较合适；它可以防止人们修改您的网站，除非他们在同一许可证下发布更改。
如果您仍然坚持原来的限制，那么任何开源许可证都不会帮助您，因为它们中的大多数都是自由软件，而不仅仅是开源。您必须编写自己的许可证，或修改现有的许可证。
This really misses the point of Free Software, or as the FSF puts it, it's open source but not really Free Software. Despite my tone, I'm not here to lecture you, I'm simply pointing out that people are not likely to help if the project has this kind of restriction.
However, if you change that to:
Then the GNU Affero General Public License might be appropriate; it prevents people from modifying your website unless they publish their changes under the same license.
If you still insist on your original restriction, then no open source license will help you, since most of them are about being Free Software, not just open source. You're going to have to write your own license, or modify an existing one.