5 ms·

Maybe Crockford was onto something when he added the "The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil" clause to JSMin's license.

meepmorp 13y ago
Your good and evil are not necessarily (almost certainly) not mine.
- tlrobinson 13y ago
  Sure, but you could come up with a license that's more specific, like "The Software shall not by used by any government agency or contractors for surveillance purposes" or whatever the equivalent legal speak is.
  - meepmorp 13y ago
    So, I can't use this computer vision library as part of my government program to prevent Rhino poaching in Africa?
    - itsybitsycoder 13y ago
      You could if you asked the author and they agreed to give you a different license.
      - mpyne 13y ago
        It's hardly free/open source software if you need to get a license from the author for each specific usage. Even MS treats their customers better than that.
        itsybitsycoder 13y ago
        You don't need a license for each specific usage. Most software doesn't involve surveillance, and most government surveillance software would probably not be an "exception" in the author's eyes. Rhino surveillance is an obscure edge case.
wavefunction 13y ago
It's a little bit silly imnsho, and it's because JSMin exists to minify JavaScript, which is generally divorced from direct "evil". And what "evil" developer is going to respect that clause in the license? They wouldn't be evil then...
DannyBee 13y ago
Except this clause is completely and utterly meaningless, legally. I have trouble seeing anyone, anywhere, ever, enforcing it.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  It actually has a great use: Do the Debian legal people annoy you? Then why not release your software unlicensed; they won't be 'able' to use it and other users who care less will. Ah, but that isn't much fun... why not rile them up as well? Enter the "do no evil" clause! By being 'open source' in such a way that they cannot use their software, you can apparently cause a decent amount of grief. They also seem to be good for getting amusing quips like "IBM requested an exception so that they can do evil with my software". Do no evil clauses are great for trolling. An anti-corporate and anti-'takes-themselves-seriously' license.
  - DannyBee 13y ago
    Sure, trolling. There is a great use of the legal system. Oh wait ....
    - jlgreco 13y ago
      Hardly even a use of the legal system, the clause would not stand up for one second. What is really being used is the victims attitudes toward the legal system. It sort of seems like this license may bother you. It really is good at this.
- tlrobinson 13y ago
  Well, it concerned IBM enough to ask Crockford for an exception: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hCimLnIsDA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hCimLnIsDA
  - DannyBee 13y ago
    So did we, because it's not really open source, and most distributions won't accept stuff that uses it (fedora, debian, etc). Thus, if you want to use it in anything open source that you actually want packaged, you need an exception.

meepmorp 13y ago

Your good and evil are not necessarily (almost certainly) not mine.

tlrobinson 13y ago
Sure, but you could come up with a license that's more specific, like "The Software shall not by used by any government agency or contractors for surveillance purposes" or whatever the equivalent legal speak is.
- meepmorp 13y ago
  So, I can't use this computer vision library as part of my government program to prevent Rhino poaching in Africa?
  - itsybitsycoder 13y ago
    You could if you asked the author and they agreed to give you a different license.
    - mpyne 13y ago
      It's hardly free/open source software if you need to get a license from the author for each specific usage. Even MS treats their customers better than that.
      - itsybitsycoder 13y ago
        You don't need a license for each specific usage. Most software doesn't involve surveillance, and most government surveillance software would probably not be an "exception" in the author's eyes. Rhino surveillance is an obscure edge case.

wavefunction 13y ago

It's a little bit silly imnsho, and it's because JSMin exists to minify JavaScript, which is generally divorced from direct "evil". And what "evil" developer is going to respect that clause in the license? They wouldn't be evil then...

DannyBee 13y ago

Except this clause is completely and utterly meaningless, legally. I have trouble seeing anyone, anywhere, ever, enforcing it.

jlgreco 13y ago
It actually has a great use: Do the Debian legal people annoy you? Then why not release your software unlicensed; they won't be 'able' to use it and other users who care less will. Ah, but that isn't much fun... why not rile them up as well? Enter the "do no evil" clause! By being 'open source' in such a way that they cannot use their software, you can apparently cause a decent amount of grief. They also seem to be good for getting amusing quips like "IBM requested an exception so that they can do evil with my software". Do no evil clauses are great for trolling. An anti-corporate and anti-'takes-themselves-seriously' license.
- DannyBee 13y ago
  Sure, trolling. There is a great use of the legal system. Oh wait ....
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    Hardly even a use of the legal system, the clause would not stand up for one second. What is really being used is the victims attitudes toward the legal system. It sort of seems like this license may bother you. It really is good at this.
tlrobinson 13y ago
Well, it concerned IBM enough to ask Crockford for an exception: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hCimLnIsDA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hCimLnIsDA
- DannyBee 13y ago
  So did we, because it's not really open source, and most distributions won't accept stuff that uses it (fedora, debian, etc). Thus, if you want to use it in anything open source that you actually want packaged, you need an exception.