-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 91
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Ethical open source licenses #2225
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Missing link?
At the same time, a chemical manufacturer often has little or no control over how their product is ultimately used once it is sold. | ||
--> | ||
|
||
Two ethical open-source licenses are currently available; the [Hippocratic License](https://firstdonoharm.dev/learn/) and the [Do No Harm License](). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Missing the link to the "Do No Harm License".
This *viral* design sought to supercede proprietary interests and ensure that software remains a shared resource free to be modified and redistributed. | ||
Legally speaking, GPL prevents commercial companies developing proprietary software from using any GPL software in their products. | ||
|
||
Eventually, commercial interests subverted this design and permissive open source licenses took hold. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't believe it was just commercial interests that didn't like the GPL and it's viral aspect. I recall that many open source advocates disliked it as well. The more permissive licenses: BSD, MIT, etc. I believe might actually pre-date the GPL and as such were not reactions to the GPL (as is kind of implied here).
Description
Draft article.
I drafted this because I had put together an IM on this topic and thought it would be easy to capture that as a CC too. Unfort, what I've drafted is a bit askew of a CC but I am not sure I have knowledge to try to develop further into a blog article.
EB Member: @rinkug
Resolves #
<issue-id>
<Other minimal information about the PR.>
PR checklist for files displayed on bssw.io site
@mention
the BSSw.io editorial board member@<eb-member-id>
in Description above assigned to shepherd your PR.<issue-id>
in the Description above for the associated GitHub Issue.[ ] [Author] Ensure.wikize_refs.py -i <base>.md
is run and commit (if using wikize_refs.py)*.md
file(s) as rendered in GitHub for this PR.<eb-member-id>
.<pr-author-id>
.content: <content-type>
for the type of contribution.Content Development
(see Content Development).*.md
file(s) (setPublish: yes
).preview
(so PR branch will be merged to 'preview' branch and watch for possible merge failures).[ ] [Author] Ensurewikize_refs.py -i <base>.md
is run and commit (if using wikize_refs.py).@betterscientificsoftware/bssw-maint
(BSSw Maint) asking to carry out final publication steps.NOTE:
@betterscientificsoftware/bssw-maint
team (hint: type@
,b
,s
,s
,w
,-
,m
to auto-complete to@betterscientificsoftware/bssw-maint
).