This is already explored - use source available instead of open source.

Presumably they want to keep the project liberally licensed modulo the "no evil" part. A source-available license would probably be too restrictive for that purpose unless it is somehow made compatible with open/free licenses. But I am not a lawyer, so I have no fucking idea what I'm talking about.

▲

jfim 4 hours ago | parent [-]

They could use the json.org license: https://www.tldrlegal.com/license/the-json-license

It's literally the MIT license with an added clause of only using the software for good, not evil.

Obviously, corporate attorneys will advise not to use the software since good and evil aren't really well defined legal terms. It's also not open source using the osi definition.

	▲	canyp 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It's also unenforceable, therefore useless.