The Hippocratic License

[Lyberta]

Deleted.

[Julius]

I don't think this will get much traction. While the Free Software movement is also idealistic it is at it's core also a clever copyright hack for the purpose of social engineering.

This only has the idealistic part, and a somewhat controversal one as well.

[freemedia2018]

OSI Co-founder Bruce Perens weighs in:

https://perens.com/2019/09/23/sorry-ms- ... cant-work/

I was so impressed by the failure of that license that I wrote into the Debian Free Software Guidelines, later re-labeled as the Open Source Definition, rules preventing discrimination against persons, groups. and fields of endeavor. The first two, discrimination against persons and groups, sound a lot like Ms. Ehmke’s intent. The last, discrimination against fields of endeavor, similarly prevents discrimination, but is opposite to her intent. It’s this one that makes the Hippocratic license not Open Source, not that I am clear its proponents care about that.

[GunChleoc]

I was so impressed by the failure of that license

For those who didn't read the whole document, "that license" in this sentence refers to a different license that was "attached to the Berkeley SPICE software by the University of California" and not the Hippocratic license.

[Lyberta]

Deleted.

[freemedia2018]

I was so impressed by the failure of that license

For those who didn't read the whole document, "that license" in this sentence refers to a different license that was "attached to the Berkeley SPICE software by the University of California" and not the Hippocratic license.

Of course. It refers to a license that Perens considers of the same type, which inspired the DFSG which inspired the OSD (both written by Perens) which is the definition of Open Source.

I shouldn't assume, but I figured most of the regulars here understand that the OSD is decades old, while this license is new.