Maybe you need to write your own clause, addressing exactly what you wish to save for yourself, as in Dgraph as a service, software in its entirety, database as a service, etc. and present permissible use cases, as in the example you mentioned, “Dgraph is being used for tracking and querying machine resources as an underlying storage layer” and others.
Open Source has become so successful because it allows universal usage and follow-on innovation without having to ask for permission. That creates a level playing field in which all participants can cooperate on equal footing and create commercial value.
In a way it is competition and cooperation in its purest form.
Adding any kind of usage restriction to an Open Source License is always a lot like asking for intervention from the state for your ailing economic cause. And once you’re hooked on the monopoly game, enough is never enough. The past 25 years have demonstrated time and again that companies going down this path almost never come back.
The background for this kind of “help me, big state, and protect my monopoly” is often a lack of understanding of Open Source business models, and failing to understand that choosing a license is not the same as developing a business model. Software license choice and business model are orthogonal questions, but laypeople often conflate and confuse them.
In this particular case it seems that the root of the Commons Clause is at Bain Capital Ventures, which has loudly complained about their own inability to build sustainable business models for Open Source.
Bain Capital Ventures has been lead investor at Fossa, as well as DGraph.
So the picture that emerges is unfortunately not pretty. It seems like FOSSA, which has a vested interest in more compliance violations and legal issues to create need for its services, has drafted the license that Bain Capital Ventures was trying to foist onto the Open Source Community in a hope to monopolise as much of the commons as possible.
From the looks of it, the founders of Dgraph have unfortunately not followed the “know your business model before you talk to VCs” mantra. So effectively we have to assume Bain Capital Ventures has taken over this show, and is pushing the Commons Clause on the Dgraph community via the management at Dgraph.
Because Dgraph has been using a CLA, that also means all contributions anyone ever made to Dgraph have now been monopolized by Bain Capital Ventures for Dgraph.
Using Dgraph under this license has become a bet on the question “How greedy do I think Bain Capital Ventures is going to be if my company or product starts making money?” Because depending on how central a role Dgraph plays in your product, they may decide to take none, some, or all of your revenue.