Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-community-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-community-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 128ED117E4 for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 08:51:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 45597 invoked by uid 500); 2 Jul 2014 08:51:54 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-community-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 45250 invoked by uid 500); 2 Jul 2014 08:51:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact community-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: community@apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list community@apache.org Received: (qmail 45111 invoked by uid 99); 2 Jul 2014 08:51:53 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 08:51:53 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of t.cservenak@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.174 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.217.174] (HELO mail-lb0-f174.google.com) (209.85.217.174) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 08:51:49 +0000 Received: by mail-lb0-f174.google.com with SMTP id u10so7728112lbd.19 for ; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 01:51:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:content-type; bh=wIoBuNCcR4K0vfEJoKnN75fHjaUFyg6kYDPNyg1qxOg=; b=lUsX2N+QnkrnVJzvBH6OwywXkpUTWpeXlQBdY5PB+0QvDh8upyDVo/tOOP4GLlufeW WR7OQdUEUs8TrpRT0t/k1uGr4SNuKAKuJkrxD7JpXvDo6rBIzYcgUzdxhQWcITHt7373 QFL6Tx/q8a8GHnb9Ez7eAcZggxo28tlcGad67EUBVOxBQGnR+eojl+9PBus1keVpq67I rrTllkGM5TL/HnJr7Gd/z5OHeSIl8itq+XpoUFX4EkWcnsbmZdNpi1qsuWv3aIR5cIWC hYwNsyouY8+S5mT/i/fw3/YNazwttPoVsHvKk+TAslDJ7MuuI7mexoqt26wPWpIqHrUC CmpQ== X-Received: by 10.112.17.7 with SMTP id k7mr38766100lbd.0.1404291088643; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 01:51:28 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: t.cservenak@gmail.com Received: by 10.112.155.168 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 01:51:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <004201cf95c9$1ea4ddc0$5bee9940$@de> From: =?UTF-8?B?VGFtw6FzIENzZXJ2ZW7DoWs=?= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 10:51:08 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: sV6JBS8o_l9bxCLjE7gPMhTGIEk Message-ID: Subject: Re: Government License To: community@apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3d8d07ffcb504fd31ff05 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --001a11c3d8d07ffcb504fd31ff05 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think this reasoning is a fluke. Terms "military" and "government" are by far to be any kind of "minority". In general yes, the license would not be OSS, but putting "specific group of people" in same drawer as "goverment" does not hold IMO. On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 10:04 AM, jan i wrote: > > > > On 2 July 2014 09:42, Jan Mat=C3=A8rne wrote: > >> Even if you could exclude cyber crime and spying from a legal use by you= r >> license - do you really think that these users would follow your license= ? >> > of course they would not, but that is beside the point. > > If you in a license exclude a specific group of people (like redhaired > vikings), it would not hold up in court, and you run the risk of being su= ed > for being against a minority. You can anytime exclude a specific use in > your license, a good example is pro. licenses that often exclude use in > conjunction with nuclear plants. > > Having made an exclusion in the license, is a possibility to sue for > illegal use, or much more important, in case of goverments, bad press (mu= ch > much effective at the fraction of the cost). > > rgds > jan I > >> >> >> Jan >> >> >> >> *Von:* Johannes Geppert [mailto:jogep@apache.org] >> *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 2. Juli 2014 09:37 >> *An:* community@apache.org >> *Betreff:* Re: Government License >> >> >> >> Is it maybe possible not to exclude people or organisations, but concret= e >> usage scenarios instead? >> >> Like cyber crime and/or spying >> >> >> >> Johannes >> >> >> ################################################# >> >> web: http://www.jgeppert.com >> >> twitter: http://twitter.com/jogep >> >> >> >> >> >> 2014-07-02 9:24 GMT+02:00 David Welton : >> >> > Closest I've seen in the 'free' area is licensing that forbids militar= y >> > uses. >> >> Which is, once again, neither 'free software' nor open source because >> it goes against the definition. You can't have it both ways: you >> can't exclude people from using it because they are military, gay, >> Illinois nazis, Alaskan women, Liechtensteiners or whatever else you >> happen to dislike. >> >> -- >> David N. Welton >> >> http://www.dedasys.com/ >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org >> >> >> > > --001a11c3d8d07ffcb504fd31ff05 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I think this reasoning is a fluke. Terms "military&qu= ot; and "government" are by far to be any kind of "minority&= quot;.

In general yes, the license would not be OSS, but= putting "specific group of people" in same drawer as "gover= ment" does not hold IMO.


On Wed,= Jul 2, 2014 at 10:04 AM, jan i <jani@apache.org> wrote:



On 2 July 2014 09:42, Jan Mat=C3=A8rne <jan@materne.d= e> wrote:

Even if you could exclude cyber = crime and spying from a legal use by your license - do you really think tha= t these users would follow your license?

of course they would not, but that is b= eside the point.

If you in a license exclude a specific g= roup of people (like redhaired vikings), it would not hold up in court, and= you run the risk of being sued for being against a minority. You can anyti= me exclude a specific use in your license, a good example is pro. licenses = that often exclude use in conjunction with nuclear plants.

Having made an exclusion in the license, is a possibility to= sue for illegal use, or much more important, in case of goverments, bad pr= ess (much much effective at the fraction of the cost).

rgds
jan I

=C2= =A0

Jan

=C2= =A0

Von: Johannes Geppert [mailto:jogep@apache.org]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 2. Juli 2014 09:37
An: community@apache.org
B= etreff: Re: Government License

=C2=A0

Is it maybe possible not to exclude people or organisations, but concr= ete usage scenarios instead?

Like cyber crime and/or spying

=C2=A0

Johannes


########################= #########################

=

=C2=A0

=C2=A0

2014-07-02 9:24 GMT+02= :00 David Welton <davidw@dedasys.com>:

> Closest I've seen in the 'free' area is licensing that for= bids military
> uses.

W= hich is, once again, neither 'free software' nor open source becaus= e
it goes against the definition. =C2=A0You can't have it both ways: you<= br>can't exclude people from using it because they are military, gay,Illinois nazis, Alaskan women, Liechtensteiners or whatever else you
h= appen to dislike.

--
David N. Welton<= /span>

h= ttp://www.dedasys.com/


---------------------------------------------------------------------To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional= commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org

=C2=A0



--001a11c3d8d07ffcb504fd31ff05--