There are plenty of licences to achieve this that'll make your code unusable.

CC-BY-NC allows you to ban commercial use. There is also the Hippocratic licence[2] which allows you to choose from a variety of "evil corporation" types, from fossil fuels, mineral exploration, the Taliban, companies that have more than 200% pay inequity, etc.

Pretty much all of these licences will make your project unusable and no longer free software, but hey, they exist!

[2] https://firstdonoharm.dev/build/

▲

TheCraiggers 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I think part of what they're trying to do is change the discussion or the "norm". For example, if every developer suddenly changed to that style of license, would you still deem it unusable?

	▲	jjmarr an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Yes, if only because of the broad patent grant. 3.1.6 is also concerning since it can be read as indemnification? > Prevent any person from exercising his/her/their right to seek an effective remedy by a competent court or national tribunal (including domestic judicial systems, international courts, arbitration bodies, and other adjudicating bodies) for actions violating the fundamental rights granted to him/her/them by applicable constitutions, applicable laws, or by this License There's also a clause allowing for specific performance which means, by using the licence for anything at a company, you're opening the risk of a court-appointed special master coming in and taking over your HR systems to enforce compliance. You also can't terminate the licence to avoid this equitable relief: > Additional Remedies: Termination of the License by failing to remedy harms in no way prevents Licensor or Supply Chain Impacted Party from seeking appropriate remedies at law or in equity. It's a fascinating conceptual legal document but completely unusable. I'm not a lawyer but using anything under this licence seems incredibly risky to me.