Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New License Forbids Human Rights Violations?

Posted by michael on from the worth-the-paper-it-is-printed-on dept.

KjetilK writes "A new license published by Hacktivismo, builds on Free Software licenses but adds clauses to "promote fundamental human rights of end-users". For those deeply involved in politics, this is a good idea, but Free Software Licenses have traditionally placed no restrictions on use." There's a news article about this as well.

5 of 400 comments (clear)

  1. Too vague? by fatwreckfan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Who will decide whether a piece of software will "promote fundamental human rights of end-users"?

  2. Great and all... by ActiveSX · · Score: 5, Interesting

    But I don't think this is compatible with the Debian Free Software Guidelines (specifically the "No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor" clause). Software needs to be compatible with the DFSG to be included in Debian, so this "HESSLA" may not be useful unless the software is dual-licensed under something like the GPL, but that defeats the purpose of using the "HESSLA" in the first place.

  3. RIFP! by metacosm · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I agree that it is meaningless -- so I have an alternative idea...

    Ransom It For Peace!

    #1. Develop a good piece of software.
    #2. Put a ransom on it.
    #3. Once enough money has been donated to set your software free -- you open-source it!
    #4. You give all the money from the ransom to the peace corps.

    The nice thing about this system is I could pay for a piece of software I like, while donating to a cause I feel strongly about, and still get the source! It is a win, win, win setup!

  4. ...this goes against what Free licenses are about. by Hobart · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Ahem. I quote. The GNU folks:...and the OpenBSD folks: ;)
    In the BSD world, we believe in making available trap-less software
    which anyone can use for any purpose. Even if they wanted to put our
    operating system into baby mulching machines or cruise missiles. We
    expose no ethic except our own of transitive freedom in sharing. We
    make no demands except credit.
    Theo DeRaadt, OpenBSD
    --
    o/~ Join us now and share the software ...
  5. Re:I guess this rules out the U.S. then... by pubjames · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is why AI and the UN are irrelevant. You cannot compare an enlightened, liberal (in the true sense of the word) and open system like the US to any totalitarian regime in the rest of the world.

    The United states is amongst only six countries that impose the death penalty on juveniles. The others: Iran, Nigeria, Pakisan, Saudi Arabia and Yemen.

    The United States is the only country besides Somalia that has not signed the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, because it contains a provision prohibiting the execution of children.

    So, you can compare the US to many totalitarian regiemes in the world.

    And if you think that you cannot compare them because the USA justice system is so infallible, you may like to refer to the study of error rates in death penalty cases "A Broken System: Error rates in Capital Cases, 1973-1995" by James S Leibman, Jeffery Fagan and Valerie West (2000). Search Google for a copy.

    The USA is currently holding 600 people indefinately captive in inhuman conditions without any due process and without any legal rights or representation. Your claim that the USA is so "enlightened, liberal and open" that AI and the UN are irrelevant is laughable.