So uh I did the current draft license in the repo, which is meant to be an additional restriction for whatever license a project is originally supposed to use.

So uh I did the current draft license in the repo, which is meant to be an additional restriction for whatever license a project is originally supposed to use. The idea I mean to show is that to exclude 996-type practice, you should use a more general definition that involves a work week and consecutive hours at work. There is no consideration on whether it will work: bad actors who violate labor laws tend to not care about FOSS licensing either. History tells us unionization and strikes would work better, but again recent Chinese news tells us with those you end up in a jail. Feasibility aside, I was dumb enough to not include something that says you gotta keep the restriction in modified version. https://github.com/996icu/996.ICU/pull/24748 https://github.com/996icu/996.ICU/pull/24748 is a fix that should get merged soon. There's also a notes on use section, which basically says: 1. It would not be GPL compatible because it adds an restrictions. Use it on more permissive licenses like MIT. 2. If you do use it, consider dual-licensing with GPL or AGPL so more people can potentially use it. Corps that do care about legal stuff don't like GPL anyways.