Anti-Harm-License
codeberg.org
A set of licenses, based on the GPL, with additional clauses to prevent the use of the software for nefarious purposes.

A set of licenses, based on the GPL, with additional clauses to prevent the use of the software for nefarious purposes.

EDIT: After some issues raised, I am rebasing the license on the Apache License 2.0 and taking more care in keeping it open.

EDIT 2: I’ve rebased it. I plan to submit it to OSI as soon as my law student friend has a look at it.

      • sik0fewl@kbin.social
        22·
        1 year ago

        It’s neither free software (as defined by the Free Software Foundation) or open source (as defined by the Open Source Initiative).

          • sik0fewl@kbin.social
            14·
            1 year ago

            The Open Source Definition from the OSI has the clause:

            The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.

            And most people (that actually care about such things) would insist that “open source” must meet the criteria of the OSD to actually be open source.

            • Hellfire103@sopuli.xyzOPEnglish
              9·
              1 year ago

              But does the license do that? It’s not discriminating against groups, it’s discriminating against actions.

                 a. You may not use this software, or any derivative works based on it, for any activities that promote or incite violence, hate, discrimination, or harm towards individuals or groups based on race, religion, gender, nationality, or any other characteristic.
   b. You may not use this software, or any derivative works based on it, for any activities that violate international human rights laws, including but not limited to activities that may lead to genocide, war crimes, or crimes against humanity.
              • mpldr@beehaw.org
                11·
                1 year ago

                Yes, even if the group is racist bigots, warlords, or plain malicious idiots, those are still covered under “any group”. And I would argue that that is a good thing. Not that these groups exist, but that there are no exceptions one might use to create trouble for users.

                Seeing how the nouveau-right loves playing their victim card, that will just be gasoline for their hate-engine.

              • sik0fewl@kbin.social
                5·
                1 year ago

                Then maybe this clause is more appropriate:

                The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.

                • sweng@programming.dev
                  2·
                  1 year ago

                  But it does restrict making use of the program in specific fields of endeavor. That’s the entire point of the license. I would e.g. not be able to use it in a business that sells hate speech literature.

                  • sik0fewl@kbin.social
                    2·
                    1 year ago

                    Yeah, that’s why I shared it with OP 🙂. I’m pretty sure that between the two clauses I quoted in this thread that his licence does not meet the OSI definition.