
What usage restrictions can we place in a free software license? - robin_reala
https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/54709.html
======
shmerl
Cases like self defense can be covered as implicit exceptions. I.e. license
can be treated as altogether irrelevant in such case.

And regarding drones and etc. It has an inherent conflict. I.e. for example
drone is stopping a killer who would have otherwise killed someone. Not using
it will impair ability of the potential victim to exercise the license all the
same.

So that doesn't sound like something that should be resolved by the license
alone.

~~~
randallsquared
> _It has an inherent conflict. I.e. for example drone is stopping a killer
> who would have otherwise killed someone. Not using it will impair ability of
> the potential victim to exercise the license all the same._

No license is required _not_ to use the software, so that is not an example of
an inherent conflict.

~~~
shmerl
License that prevents stopping a killer is already unethical, so I assume we
are not talking about such cases. The assumption is that license is aiming at
preventing using it for some evil intent, but not for valid defense or crime
prevention.

~~~
manicdee
The truly unethical thing here is the hypothetical lethal force drone
available with such fast response time that it can stop a killer, and the law
enforcement framework that allows the killer to get to the point that a lethal
force drone is the obvious solution rather than boots on the ground.

The entire hypothetical setup is unethical, existing only to justify rampant
violation of licenses.

~~~
shmerl
That's moot. How do you define the "fast response" or "lethal force" levels of
what's ethical or not here?

~~~
manicdee
“Lethal force” is its own definition: it is lethal, which means the target
dies.

“Fast response” is already defined as “fast enough to stop a killer” which
implies that these things will be deployed 24/7 waiting to be called into
service at a moment’s notice.

That means you are setting up expensive infrastructure and a need to justify
the ongoing expense which means a police force predisposed to using lethal
force for any encounter.

~~~
shmerl
Being set up 24/7 is not a requirement for the drone itself, it's something
about how it's operated. Seems like your idea is that license would need to
specify very narrow requirements for each case.

------
luckylion
Doesn't this just shift the "what is evil"-problem to "what is impairment"?
Drone strike yes, ATM-withdrawal rejection no?

------
mirimir
I suspect that there are exemptions from licensing restrictions for military
applications. But I'm having no luck finding anything except re driving.

