|
|
|
| Authored by: Ed L. on Monday, May 21 2012 @ 12:26 AM EDT |
| Basically. One would need poke around fsf.org / gnu.org a bit for the exact
restriction, but it would be risky to modify GPL and call it "GPL_NON_USA_V2" as
suggested. Doesn't mean one couldn't write such a license, provided it in no way
refers to "GPL". There may be guidelines at the above sites, or email them for
clarification.
I've seen licenses very similar to GPL, but without the
philosophising because they had different philosophies. One restricted usage to
non-defence related applications. More common are "Free for non-commercial use:
you want it to make money, we want a cut."
[shrug]
---
Real
Programmers mangle their own memory. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: complex_number on Monday, May 21 2012 @ 09:30 AM EDT |
Sorry PJ. My comment that has led to all this was reall bourne out of
frustration rather than a will to actually do it.
Many countried have trade embargoes with other ones.
For others, exports are restricted to certain things.
I'd like to restrict where the code I release can be used simply to avoid being
sued into oblivion. I know that a GPL style license can't be used but something
like this may well have to be considered if Oracle wins here especially wrt API
copyrights.
---
Ubuntu & 'apt-get' are not the answer to Life, The Universe & Everything which
is of course, "42" or is it 1.618?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
