5 ms·

Like the JSON license. MIT with this additional clause: The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil.

mschuster91 14y ago
Who defines what is "good" and "evil"? Just take the example "pornography": in most Western countries pornography is accepted and not considered as "evil", but in many Islamic countries, pornography is considered sinful.
- Vivtek 14y ago
  You obviously didn't grow up in the same Western country I did.
- hobs 14y ago
  A better example is the one that was used on github, war. There will always be justifications that a war is needed because of this oppressor or that incursion or this unforgivable action. Licensing it differently is one option, but either they wont care or they will just copy the intent and make their own version. This is a problem without a good solution at this point except to have a frank and adult understanding of the consequences of your actions, and to be politically active so that you may contribute you part to preventing your government from the continuous war.
- knowtheory 14y ago
  As a practical matter in the US, if it's not a criminal matter, it's the entity/individual bringing suit against a defendant, and additionally the court who must ensure that the plaintiff has standing to bring suit. Crockford in this particular case seems like the most likely plaintiff, but I don't know if there would be other parties who would also have standing or not (also, i'm not a lawyer, so take this as you will).
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- jamessb 14y ago
  This concerned IBM, so Crockford sent them a document saying : "I give permission for IBM, its customers, partners, and minions, to use JSLint for evil." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5138866 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5138866
  - yjyft846jh 14y ago
    Makes sense for IBM, as they do have a history of that sort of thing [1]. [1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/mar/29/humanities.highereducation http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/mar/29/humanities.highe...
- rmc 14y ago
  Who defines it? The judge or jury. This is the Law 101. This is why legalese is so dense and complex, to remove as much flexibility and doubt as possible, so that you don't have a judge/jury deciding things. If you include the definition of the terms in the contract/licence then the judge/jury had to follow that.

Who defines what is "good" and "evil"? Just take the example "pornography": in most Western countries pornography is accepted and not considered as "evil", but in many Islamic countries, pornography is considered sinful.

Vivtek 14y ago
You obviously didn't grow up in the same Western country I did.
hobs 14y ago
A better example is the one that was used on github, war. There will always be justifications that a war is needed because of this oppressor or that incursion or this unforgivable action. Licensing it differently is one option, but either they wont care or they will just copy the intent and make their own version. This is a problem without a good solution at this point except to have a frank and adult understanding of the consequences of your actions, and to be politically active so that you may contribute you part to preventing your government from the continuous war.
knowtheory 14y ago
As a practical matter in the US, if it's not a criminal matter, it's the entity/individual bringing suit against a defendant, and additionally the court who must ensure that the plaintiff has standing to bring suit. Crockford in this particular case seems like the most likely plaintiff, but I don't know if there would be other parties who would also have standing or not (also, i'm not a lawyer, so take this as you will).
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
jamessb 14y ago
This concerned IBM, so Crockford sent them a document saying : "I give permission for IBM, its customers, partners, and minions, to use JSLint for evil." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5138866 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5138866
- yjyft846jh 14y ago
  Makes sense for IBM, as they do have a history of that sort of thing [1]. [1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/mar/29/humanities.highereducation http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/mar/29/humanities.highe...
rmc 14y ago
Who defines it? The judge or jury. This is the Law 101. This is why legalese is so dense and complex, to remove as much flexibility and doubt as possible, so that you don't have a judge/jury deciding things. If you include the definition of the terms in the contract/licence then the judge/jury had to follow that.