5 ms·

This reminds me of the JSON license, which includes a clause stating that "The software shall be used for good, not evil." That particular clause has caused qu

This reminds me of the JSON license, which includes a clause stating that "The software shall be used for good, not evil." That particular clause has caused quite a bit of headache for PHP package maintainers, because technically it makes the license a non-open source license, even though the rest of the license is just your bog standard MIT/BSD-like license. Long story short, don't write your own licenses.

belorn 12y ago
Im looking through the OSI definition (http://opensource.org/osd-annotated http://opensource.org/osd-annotated) and wondering what clause would break from a "for good, not evil" requirement. Would it be Discrimination Against evil Fields of Endeavor?
- lmm 12y ago
  Yes, exactly that. Evil is a perfectly legitimate field of endeavour.
- rtpg 12y ago
  Pretty sure it's that. I mean is finance work evil? Somebody might think so..
- rmc 12y ago
  Pretty much. The problem is how you define "good" and "evil"? Can the US military use this software? Can a church that prints a document about "traditional marriage" use this software? Can an anti-fascist group use it to organise physical confrontation with far right groups? What does evil mean? You'll need to ask a judge.
  - cbd1984 12y ago
    And the worst part is, the developer will likely refuse to see that there is, or ever could be, a problem. "It's evil, fercryingoutloud! Don't do evil! Everyone knows what evil is!" And it gets used, and that clause sits there, like a hidden dog turd, waiting for someone to step in the wrong spot, and all of a sudden the developer and their minions are up in arms about the user and their minions, who are so obviously evil that there shouldn't even be a discussion. Because it's evil, and evil is self-evident. Except it isn't. It really, really isn't.
    - detaro 12y ago
      Nah, he knows that this is problematic. See link posted by evacchi, he gives out additional licenses to companies that ask. It's highly annoying for all open-source projects of course, since they have to keep an extra license on just these few files. So they can't combine it with GPL, ...
tajen 12y ago
The full legend/joke says Douglas Crockford (the inventor of Json) receives every year a request from an lawyer at IBM asking "What do you mean with 'evil'?". So every year DC returns a letter to this lawyer saying "I hereby authorize IBM to use my software for evil".
- evacchi 12y ago
  "IBM, its customers, partners, and minions" (which is the most hilarious part) see e.g.: http://wonko.com/post/jsmin-isnt-welcome-on-google-code http://wonko.com/post/jsmin-isnt-welcome-on-google-code
  - tajen 12y ago
    Sorry for the useless comment, but this is golden. Can't upvote you enough.

belorn 12y ago

Im looking through the OSI definition (http://opensource.org/osd-annotated http://opensource.org/osd-annotated) and wondering what clause would break from a "for good, not evil" requirement. Would it be Discrimination Against evil Fields of Endeavor?

lmm 12y ago
Yes, exactly that. Evil is a perfectly legitimate field of endeavour.
rtpg 12y ago
Pretty sure it's that. I mean is finance work evil? Somebody might think so..
rmc 12y ago
Pretty much. The problem is how you define "good" and "evil"? Can the US military use this software? Can a church that prints a document about "traditional marriage" use this software? Can an anti-fascist group use it to organise physical confrontation with far right groups? What does evil mean? You'll need to ask a judge.
- cbd1984 12y ago
  And the worst part is, the developer will likely refuse to see that there is, or ever could be, a problem. "It's evil, fercryingoutloud! Don't do evil! Everyone knows what evil is!" And it gets used, and that clause sits there, like a hidden dog turd, waiting for someone to step in the wrong spot, and all of a sudden the developer and their minions are up in arms about the user and their minions, who are so obviously evil that there shouldn't even be a discussion. Because it's evil, and evil is self-evident. Except it isn't. It really, really isn't.
  - detaro 12y ago
    Nah, he knows that this is problematic. See link posted by evacchi, he gives out additional licenses to companies that ask. It's highly annoying for all open-source projects of course, since they have to keep an extra license on just these few files. So they can't combine it with GPL, ...

tajen 12y ago

The full legend/joke says Douglas Crockford (the inventor of Json) receives every year a request from an lawyer at IBM asking "What do you mean with 'evil'?". So every year DC returns a letter to this lawyer saying "I hereby authorize IBM to use my software for evil".

evacchi 12y ago
"IBM, its customers, partners, and minions" (which is the most hilarious part) see e.g.: http://wonko.com/post/jsmin-isnt-welcome-on-google-code http://wonko.com/post/jsmin-isnt-welcome-on-google-code
- tajen 12y ago
  Sorry for the useless comment, but this is golden. Can't upvote you enough.