Re: [License-discuss] documentation on un-enforceability of ethical licenses? (was Re: License Review Request - Anu Initiative

> On Feb 6, 2024, at 10:39 AM, Stefano Maffulli wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 4:18 PM Daniel Mihai > wrote: >> We are happy to remove the restriction of use for positive ecological >> conservation and sustainability, yet we are not happy to allow usage of

Re: [License-discuss] Query on "delayed open source" licensing

> On Oct 27, 2023, at 2:06 PM, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote: > > FWIW, I can confirm Larry Rosen's suggestion that indeed L. Peter Deutsch and > Aladdin Ghostscript likely invented the manipulative marketing approach of > pre-announcing that proprietary software might someday be FOSS and/or making > s

Re: [License-discuss] How can we as a community help empower authors outside license agreements?

> On Mar 18, 2020, at 12:46 PM, Brian Behlendorf wrote: > > > Any long term community or institution unwilling to occasionally reconsider > any of its core principles is one doomed to eventual irrelevance. The U.S. > Constitution has been successfully amended 27 times, with the first ten of

Re: [License-discuss] Ethical open source licensing - Dual Licensing for Justice

> On Mar 6, 2020, at 3:52 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Eric Schultz: > >> Description: >> The idea for Dual Licensing for Justice comes from, you guessed it, dual >> licensing and my own experience with the [license for the Houdini Project]( >> https://github.com/houdiniproject/houdini/blo

Re: [License-discuss] "Ethical open source" and the Persona Non Grata clause.

> On Feb 24, 2020, at 8:44 AM, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > > With whatever moral authority I still have here, I say to all > advocates of soi-disant "ethical" licensing not just "No" but "To hell > with you *and* the horse you rode in on." FTR, I find the final part of that sentence uncalled for

Re: [License-discuss] Ethical open source licensing - Persona non Grata Preamble

Which is fine. It's their code and they can license it however they want. They just can't call it Open Source. > On Feb 21, 2020, at 11:24 AM, Brendan Hickey > wrote: > > While this may all seem hypothetical, a decade ago a developer bungled his > taxes and retaliated by banning the Belgian g

Re: [License-discuss] Ethical open source licensing - Persona non Grata Preamble

> On Feb 20, 2020, at 9:16 PM, Eric Schultz wrote: > > Instead I've been thinking through ways in which licensing and ethical FOSS > community policies can interact in order to discourage and shame morally > corrupt users. So who defines who is "morally corrupt"? Who exactly is a "bad acto

Re: [License-discuss] Proposed license decision process

Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose Nothin', don't mean nothin' hon' if it ain't free, no no > On Dec 7, 2018, at 3:57 AM, Bruce Perens wrote: > > It's nice that the purpose is acknowledged to be "software freedom". However, > people wanting a programatic definition of that w

Re: [License-discuss] Open source license with obligation to display an attribution?

ution, but my goal is to have as many people use my code as possible. My 2c > On Dec 5, 2018, at 12:53 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote: > > Jim Jagielski asked: > > I am not exactly sure how the wants, needs, and desires of GOSS are > > different from the entire FOSS communi

Re: [License-discuss] Open source license with obligation to display an attribution?

I am not exactly sure how the wants, needs, and desires of GOSS are different from the entire FOSS community in general... or why it should be accorded "special" treatment or consideration. Just my 2c > On Dec 5, 2018, at 7:26 AM, Tzeng, Nigel H. wrote: > > Alas the OSI has been highly unresp

Re: [License-discuss] Open source software licenses and the OSD

Thank you for this. > On Nov 7, 2018, at 11:19 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote: > > The initial debate between RMS and the OSI founders was some confusing > nonsense over socialism vs. capitalism (in technical lingo as software > license language rather than politics). I was initially confused. I fou