[License-discuss] Ethical open source licensing - Dual Licensing for Justice

[Florian Weimer]

* Eric Schultz:

> Description:
> The idea for Dual Licensing for Justice comes from, you guessed it, dual
> licensing and my own experience with the [license for the Houdini Project](
> https://github.com/houdiniproject/houdini/blob/master/LICENSE) which I help
> lead. It's additionally inspired by the GPLvX-or-later license notice. In
> this tactic, a strong copy-left license could apply to the software. The
> community would draft a special exception to that license which grants all
> users except a set of listed entities the right to use the software under a
> more permissive license. As an example, consider the following, utterly
> non-legally valid special exception:
> ---
> As a special exception to the normal AGPLv3 license, all users except
> Amazon and their employees may choose, to redistribute and/or modify this
> software under the LGPLv3 license.
> ---
> This special exception makes clear who the community considers a bad actor
> and initially imposes greater obligations on them than anyone else. That
> said, I strongly believe it is FSD compatible and also believe it is OSD
> compatible. All parties receive a set of rights and obligations that comply
> with both definitions.

Does the GPL, version 3, go in that direction?  It does not mention
Microsoft, Novell, or SUSE by name, but if I recall correctly, a lot
of the patent-related language was inspired by a business transaction
between those companies the GPL authors deemed unethical.  Similar for
the use of of formely free software by Tivo.  Although I think that
the GPL is actually pro-Tivoization, considering the “running the
covered works […] on your behalf” exception: it seems to cover the
kind of edge computing that Tivo does (or did at the time).