Recent searches
Search options
Me: Free software licenses should include ethics clauses.
Folks: Don’t be silly, you can’t put restrictions on licenses like that. It’s unworkable.
Apple: You can only run this operating system on hardware I sell.
Folks: Sounds good to us, sir. Whatever you say, boss!
If our only answer to unethical licenses is indifferent ones—as opposed to ethical ones—I don’t see how we win this. I feel the offhand dismissal of ethical licenses in technology has been and is a mistake.
Quick poll for all the developers out there:
Say there’s a new free and open source license (not approved by the FSF) that is essentially AGPL version 3 but with one additional clause:
“You must not use this code as part of any system designed to profile, discriminate against, or otherwise oppress people based on their race, gender, sexuality, religion, or any other protected characteristic under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”
Would you consider adopting it?
Any pretense that this was meant to be a serious discussion was lost with a poll that asks.
A) Do you disagree with my statement BECAUSE you want your work to be used to kill puppies and destroy lives.
or
B) Or are you a good person who obviously agrees with me.
Clearly, there are no other options.
The kind of poll I expect from a corporate marketing campaign.
@stpaultim It simply states the consequences in plain language.
And if you read the replies, you will see it has already sparked a long and healthy discussion.
It's probably best I unfollow you.
This is the kind of poll I expect from political fundraising committee, closed minded activists, or corporate marketing folks. Not anyone interested in a real discussion about an important issue.
I expected more.
Good luck.
