On 2 July 2014 09:42, Jan Matèrne <j...@materne.de> wrote: > Even if you could exclude cyber crime and spying from a legal use by your > 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 sued 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 (much much effective at the fraction of the cost). rgds jan I > > > Jan > > > > *Von:* Johannes Geppert [mailto:jo...@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 concrete > 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 <dav...@dedasys.com>: > > > Closest I've seen in the 'free' area is licensing that forbids military > > 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-unsubscr...@apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: community-h...@apache.org > > >
