Modifying Open Source Licenses

[Christopher Browne]

On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Scott Elcomb <psema4-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org> wrote:
> which brings me to the question:  Can open licenses be "reconfigured"
> to support ethical initiatives against "social diseases" like hate,
> violence and/or exploitation?

In principle, you might try; in practice, this sort of thing leads to
the resulting software becoming a mere "curiosity" in that it's no
longer a particularly "free" software license, and nobody ever looks
at it again.

Back in the days when everyone was boycotting everything in South
Africa due to the apartheid thing (I suspect there is now a generation
that would give a blank stare if asked about "apartheid South
Africa"), there was software where licenses forbade use in South
Africa.

Nobody wants to get into the verification game.  One of the particular
values of "free software" is that you don't usually need to go into
excruciating detail about how you're planning to use it to validate
this against its license.

"Reconfiguration against social diseases" breaks that.

If you imagine discrimination is evil, then the act of putting a
clause in your license that discriminates against users is a
contradiction of the imagined principle.

Note that in the "Open Source Initiative" (the Eric Raymond thing
about declaring what OSS is supposed to be about), this is
specifically talked about:

------------------------
5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups

The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.
------------------------
-- 
http://linuxfinances.info/info/linuxdistributions.html
Rita Rudner  - "Before I met my husband, I'd never fallen in love. I'd
stepped in it a few times."
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists