3 ms·
I'm not quite sure why this is downvoted, although I understand the nuance, it seems an interesting and related point. Out of interest, are there open source l
by cs02rm0 8y ago
I'm not quite sure why this is downvoted, although I understand the nuance, it seems an interesting and related point.
Out of interest, are there open source licenses that prevent use in military projects? ISTR reading something recently about it being legally questionable to discriminate between who can accept a license, but that was in the context of allowing open source for non-commercial purposes.
- robin_reala 8y agoCrockford’s original JSON licence banned the use of the technology for evil, but IBM’s lawyers knew that a bunch of their projects couldn’t be guaranteed to be 100% evil-free and negotiated an exemption.
- hsivonen 8y agoBy definition, a license that has Field of Use restrictions is not an Open Source license. Creative Commons NonCommercial licenses, for example, are neither Open Source nor Free Software licenses.
- s73v3r_ 8y agoI imagine that someone who wants to prevent use of their work by the military would not be concerned over whether something is technically not open source or not.
- palotasb 8y agoI don't think the idea of free software and banning specific uses is compatible. OSI also says that they require no such discrimination: https://opensource.org/osd https://opensource.org/osd (points 5, 6)
- r3bl 8y ago> Out of interest, are there open source licenses that prevent use in military projects? This question is an oxymoron. Both the definition of open source (by the Open Source Initiative) and the definition of free software (by the Free Software Foundation) explicitly forbid discriminating against any person or a group of people for software to be considered as open source / free software.