The answer is simple A-GPL
Yep, and good luck acquiring users!
Do we need to rethink what free software is?
11–20 of 153 posts
Re: Do we need to rethink what free software is?
#12Interesting article.
The problem of ethical use of something is not limited to software. When you get any tangible object, you don’t usually get usage restrictions from a license. So, if this is a problem to solve, I think that the solution should be sought more generally, not restricting the scope to software. (edit: and not to an individual software, which would be a weak way of "preventing" an unethical practice at the society level anyway).
Usage of tangible objects is restricted by law. I think it should be the same for software. And yes, law is not perfect, and not the same for different countries.
Everybody has their own, evolving, ethics. If everybody starts restricting usage for random things in licenses, we may be in for a big mess. And I say this as someone who has an opinion on many ethical matters.
Re: Do we need to rethink what free software is?
#13Good write up. It is a tough question, but I personally think that we are all well served with LGPL/GPL/AGPL, Apache 2, and MIT licenses.
I understand the motivation for other more specific licenses, but it is also an advantage to just have a small set of licenses that people are familiar with.
I like to release stuff under ‘use either Apache 2 or GPL’, your choice. However, I honestly don’t know what problems that might cause people.
If I had to choose one license for all my stuff I would choose LGPL (permit free commercial use, changes to library must be shared) but a lot of my open source code is examples for my books so I like to be broad as possible, license wise.
Re: Do we need to rethink what free software is?
#14[flagged]
Re: Do we need to rethink what free software is?
#15[deleted]
Re: Do we need to rethink what free software is?
#16The solution here is simple: abandon intellectual slavery laws. They don’t do anyone any good except the 1%. Look at the richest amongst us, a sizable majority are rich because of IS laws. Forcing poor people the world over to pay artificially high prices for intellectual goods, by threat of force, is a form of slavery, poor and simple. Anyone who says they will stop making new ideas if they don’t get artificially in…
Be careful of what you ask for. IP laws are the foundation of what makes the GPL enforceable.
Re: Do we need to rethink what free software is?
#17The solution here is simple: abandon intellectual slavery laws. They don’t do anyone any good except the 1%. Look at the richest amongst us, a sizable majority are rich because of IS laws. Forcing poor people the world over to pay artificially high prices for intellectual goods, by threat of force, is a form of slavery, poor and simple. Anyone who says they will stop making new ideas if they don’t get artificially in…
Be careful of what you ask for. IP laws are the foundation of what makes the GPL enforceable.
We need a 'right to repair' for software -- anyone release commercial software should be forced to release the source code and allow users to build, modify and distribute it for free.
Re: Do we need to rethink what free software is?
#18> As stewards of the free software definition, the Free Software Foundation should be taking the lead in ensuring that these issues are discussed. They came to a consensus yeeeears ago about what can and cannot go into Free Software licenses. I'm all for more fairness, but remember that for example the GPL is a giant legal hack, and maybe the next breakthrough will be an equally big legal and/of technical hack and no…
> but remember that for example the GPL is a giant legal hack Tax avoidance schemes are also legal hacks. If you can (ab)use something for bad things, then you should be able to (ab)use it for good things as well, yes? EDITED
Tax evasion schemes are not legal, by definition.
Maybe you are thinking of 'tax avoidance'?
Re: Do we need to rethink what free software is?
#19Whether software is used for ethical or unethical purposes has nothing to do with the license. There is no possible way to bake subjective ethical usage guidelines into a license and still end up with free software.
Trying to license "good" and "evil" boils down to the same slippery slope that the TOR Project dealt with when they had to reject requests to add censorship mechanisms. "Can't we just censor hate speech?"
Software is a tool. How that tool is used is at the discretion of the user. If a developer is concerned that a project could be used for evil, then he or she should consider whether releasing the software publicly is a morally good choice in the first place.
Re: Do we need to rethink what free software is?
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but remember that for example the GPL is a giant legal hack Tax avoidance schemes are also legal hacks. If you can (ab)use something for bad things, then you should be able to (ab)use it for good things as well, yes? EDITED
Tax evasion schemes are not legal, by definition. Maybe you are thinking of 'tax avoidance'?
Yes, you get the point.