Hacker News Reader

Comment by usui | Hacker News Reader

Is there an example of a software with a license with more overt political views being directly stated in the agreement ? I'm NOT saying that it's wrong to have personal views, or to make a statement about what Mastodon feels about Trump's Truth Social, but I am curious if there is software in wide-use with something like "No anti-vaxxers". So far the most ideology-enforcing licenses I know are mainly about the battle for Free Software or code availability. Just imagine if there was a license demanding a certain way to feel politically (other than open-source political views).

View on HN

IIRC, there were a lot of those licenses in the 1990s and early 2000s. They were mostly all weeded out in the license flame wars, largely initiated by system integrators and re-distributors who wanted to have a standardized set of licenses and not have to deal with any cute extra restrictions. Nowadays, software should use a license approved by OSI or FSF, or the software will find itself not being worth consideration.

> Nowadays, software should use a license approved by OSI or FSF, or the software will find itself not being worth consideration.

I wonder if Mongo DB and Elasticsearch are currently learning this lesson.

Somebody should break this bad news to Snowflake, SalesForce, Airtable, AWS, Azure, Google, Firestore etc. etc.

Back in 2004 Fyodor, creator of nmap, terminated SCO's rights to use it based on their suit against IBM and general attacks on the Linux community. A very specific example, but one that immediately came to mind when reading your comment.

https://www.smh.com.au/technology/fyodor-terminates-sco-righ...

There are also a few that disallow the software to be used in nuclear facilities[0]

I think there is a fairly long tail of variations and similar [1]. As others have mentioned I think the additional restrictions aren't particularly popular.

[0] https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause-No-Nuclear-License-20...

[1] https://blueoakcouncil.org/list

Notoriously, JSLint, which can only be used for evil if you happen to be IBM: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Crockford#%22Good,_not...

GlovePIE's license forbids militaries from using it.

Well, there is the BipCot NoGov license, made by libertarians, that bans use by the government. Being committed libertarians, they don't enforce it with copyright law. I think it's mostly for humor.

https://bipcot.org/

Well, in the licence, Apple wouldn't let me use iTunes to build nukes, so that was rude.

There's the json "don't use this for evil" license.

Wow! I had no idea. That is actually hilarious and many parties have even used that to reject it's inclusion as Free Software https://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/jsonevil

I was hoping for something more enforceable than that, but still interesting enough. Looks like half of all companies using JSON are in trouble (obviously it's subjective, don't think that needs to be said).

It's not the JSON format, but rather certain libraries which process JSON (I should have been more precise). Many companies avoid using those libraries for that very reason.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com