On 7/2/24 01:45, Pamela Chestek wrote:
Instead I think it's a practical problem. Licenses are not
self-enforcing, someone has to bring a legal claim for enforcement. Only
the licensor can enforce the contract (unless the license has a third
party beneficiary, in which case the third party can enforce it only
insofar as that party's interest is impacted). Is the licensor going to
become the ethics police of the world, committing resources to go after
every use that breaches the ethics provision?
I suspect that this is the literal intention of at least some of the
proposed "ethical" licenses[1]. The desire to gain discretionary power
over others is an understandable one — particularly in contested
political spaces — but probably not one that OSI has much to gain by
facilitating, for example by approving a discriminatory license.
- Roland
1: I have no idea about the motivations of the Anu Initiative in this
respect.
_______________________________________________
The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not
necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the
Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.
License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss@lists.opensource.org
http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
