If you prevent licensing software to large corporations, small corporations won't use it, either, because small corporations may get acquired by large ones. Such a license would be a "poison pill".

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.

We picked the Boost license for the D Language Foundation because it is the closest to public domain we could find.

Besides, why would "bad guys" be deterred by a license, anyway?

▲

O_H_E 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Besides, why would "bad guys" be deterred by a license, anyway?

I imagine because we're talking about a subcategory of "bad guys" who still like to stay within the confines of the law (supposedly at least).

▲

arthurcolle 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Why isn't there a "if I like you you can use it"

I like you @WalterBright you can use any of my stuff even if you get acquired

▲

limagnolia 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Umm, there is. Basically, thats the default in most of the world. My recomendation if that is what you want to do, is to put a note in the readme and in LICENSE.txt that says "this project is copyright by me. If you want to use i, reach out to me and if I like you, I will give you a license". Then if you like someone, give them a written statement that you like them, and grant them permission to use your project(s), and under what terms, if any.

▲

surgical_fire 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I sort of like this. I wonder if it is enforceable.

"For my friends everything, for my enemies the law" software license.

	▲	ethmarks 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> I wonder if it is enforceable. I can't imagine that it wouldn't be. If a company has explicit written permission from the copyright owner granting permission to use that copyright, then they can use it. Also, it wouldn't be a special license. If you wanted to do a "For my friends everything, for my enemies the law" thing, you'd just set it as all rights reserved and add special note encouraging people to ask for permission to use it. Plus, copyright enforcement typically goes in the other direction. It's not about who you can sue, it's about who you can't. Licenses are just a way of specifying who you cannot sue. If you want everybody to use your project but don't want to bother with a license, you can make it all rights reserved (the legal default) and just not sue anybody. You could sue them if you wanted to (which is why nobody would ever use your code: because of the risk that you change your mind and sue them), but nobody is forcing you to.

▲

WalterBright 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Thank you kindly!

There's not a whole lot of point to acquiring Boost licensed software. Of course, they could always acquire me and pay me handsomely!

▲

burnt-resistor 44 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Exactly. Unreasonable conditions imposed on everyone to "solve" an ideological or societal matter impose externalities on bystanders. It's religious fervor not backed by honest appreciation of human nature or reality. While I don't like end-uses that exploit or harm others, there is no meaningful magic spell that can police usage of code gifts apart from not giving away anything and micromanaging every single invocation for moral purity.

▲

BrenBarn 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Such a poison pill could be considered a feature insofar as it discourages consolidation of companies.

	▲	hacym 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		There are very few, if any, projects big enough to be a consideration to NOT acquire an entire company.
	▲	WalterBright 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Big companies can implement economies of scale. This is what makes the country wealthy.