[License-discuss] Protecting database integrity

John Cowan cowan at ccil.org
Mon Mar 6 03:12:59 UTC 2017

On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Terrence Bull <terrence at woogloo.com> wrote:

I want to release the software for everyone to use - however, It is
> important that someone doesn’t simply ‘disconnect’ their copy of the
> database as this will screw with the integrity of the ‘universal’ nature of
> the system.

I don't see that any sort of _public_ license, open-source or not, will
work.  You will have to get every user to sign a contract to that effect,
along with preventing all redistribution, and there is of course no way to
do that consistently with the Open Source Definition.

What are your motives for preventing people from running disconnected
copies of the program, or for that matter separate networks of copies?  If
it is commercial advantage, that's one thing, and you should go with a
closed-souroce scheme.  If it is a "commons" argument (everyone is better
off if there's just One Big Network), then you should make the case in your
documentation.  Most people use a public blockchain, for good and
sufficient reasons, but there is nothing stopping anyone from setting up
their own blockchains, and people do if they have use for it.

John Cowan          http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
The native charset of SMS messages supports English, French, mainland
Scandinavian languages, German, Italian, Spanish with no accents, and
GREEK SHOUTING.  Everything else has to be Unicode, which means you get
only 70 16-bit characters in a text instead of 160 7-bit characters.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20170305/877f13fd/attachment.html>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list