This is about as effective as ripping an arm off your shirt and throwing it in the vicinity of an ICE agent.
The result of that effort will be a day fielding questions from everyone but ICE about what the heck is wrong with your shirt.
Lerna relicences to protest ICE
21–30 of 162 posts
Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE
#22Pointless. Here's a version without the restrictions: https://github.com/lerna/lerna/tree/02a2380b8f18c35799600320...
Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE
#23very unfortunate to have this in the license.
I guess in the future, we will use our selective outrage, to decide which formulas / research work can be used and by whom.
Jamie Build is welcome to establish charity organization to help, whoever he believes the victims are.
Given current practice of economic prosecution of conservative voices, Technology folks who would choose voice their support for Trumps administration, ICE, etc -- would end up loosing their jobs in the tech sector.
Just like what happened to javascript creator, Brendan Eich [1].
[1] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/04/mozill...
Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE
#24[deleted]
Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE
#25It's a nice idea. But I still pay taxes in the US. Does that make me an ICE collaborator?
Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE
#26Just change the license to closed source and start charging for licenses from the companies you want to do business with so I have an excuse to spend the time ripping your shark-jumping software out of my build.
Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE
#27As usual, this is only valid if every contributor has agreed to the relicensing. Otherwise the project maintainers are infringing the copyright of the contributors by violating the license granted to them by each contributor. I see this all too frequently. It's scary the legal recourse people open themselves up to by not understanding licensing. That aside, I know very little about these companies involvement in "ICE…
The MIT license has no restriction on applying additional restrictions, without the permission of the contributors. For example, MIT licensed software can be used in proprietary software.
It's not a MIT issue, it's a copyright issue.
They're distributing the original contributions under the new license without honouring the terms of the original license.
The software isn't now MIT+additional terms, it's MIT and MIT+additional terms. Meaning they need to continue to honour the MIT license for all exisiting contributions, just the same way as we need to when we use MIT licensed software. Namely, printing the license as is, unaltered.
They are free to do that then say that future contributions are licensed according to the new license, but the conditions of the contributors' license can't be ignored.
Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE
#28I'd be very happy if someone could present a counter argument to this: this is something expressly against the spirit of the MIT license and Lerna should not continue claiming that the software is MIT licensed. https://opensource.org/osd In particular, this seems like a pretty explicit violation of the "no discrimination against field of endeavor" clause. Here is the text of the MIT license: " Permission is hereby gr…
I don’t think there is a reasonable counter argument. It’s not a free license, for the same reason the JSON license isn’t. https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#JSON
It's not an Open Source license either, violating criteria 5 and 6 of the definition. https://opensource.org/osd-annotated
Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE
#29This kind of thing is old hat. It comes up from time to time. rms has written about it a couple of times.
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/hessla.html
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/programs-must-not-limit-freed...
His basic argument is that it would achieve nothing because such restrictions based on copyright law are likely unenforcible. It just makes the software pointlessly non-free.
Re: Lerna relicences to protest ICE
#30Slightly off-topic, but: anyone know where I can find a solid debate / discussion on the political issues raised by illegal immigration in the U.S.?
My own views lean pretty strongly towards one end of the spectrum, and I simply can't understand why people would hold the opposite views. So I suspect I'm missing something.