Interesting, a whole thread dedicated to ridicule over license compliance.
It is simple, no matter how trivial this line in the PHP5-JSON license is, it conflicts with the GPL clause that forbids restrictions beyond what is covered in the GPL.
You can love the GPL or hate it, but it is a license written to make sure that everybody has the same rights and obligations under the license, no matter what.
The "do no evil clause" supersedes the restrictions in the GPL and as such conflicts with it. It makes the combination of the two non-distributable.
Besides, who would want to prohibit Dr. Evil from using PHP5-JSON code for his Sharks-with-frikin-Lasers-attached-to-their-heads?
That'd be an interesting read if anyone has a link.edit: Put another way, what does Stallman think about the fact that a lot of GNU code is being using to restrict liberties around the world?
Yes! Get this garbage out of Debian ASAP!
I'll say it before and I'll say it again, programmers make terrible lawyers and vice versa.
So I heard you were considering using this open source software on your PC. As it turns out, I have a company that employs a few dozen people and we developed a proprietary solution that costs a few hundred dollars to use on your PC. It has been reported to us anonymously that you have unfortunately decided not to purchase our software.
We'd like to inform you that by not purchasing our software we cannot continue to keep our employees employed, and our employees feel that you are doing evil to them and so you don't actually have a license to use the "open source" software that you're using.
In addition to that, an economist has determined that by not purchasing our software, this causes damage to our local economy which we take as an additional sign that you are using this open source software for evil and are in violation of the open source software's licensing agreement that specifically says the software can be used for good, and not evil!
As a matter of fact, one of our employees recently had a baby and we're looking at having to downsize because nobody buys our software. They're going to lose their house because they can't make payments and they're going to be forced to move in with their parents. Clearly, anybody can see that forcing such a situation onto somebody, is the work of a mastermind of pure evil.
As such, we're just informing you that you don't actually have a license to use the open source software and continuing to use it is just the same crime as pirating any copy of Microsoft Windows without a license.
Of course, we offer you a licensing option of our software that you can purchase from us and we'll guarantee that you won't be in violation of any licenses.
Think this couldn't happen? That's what people said about SCO vs. IBM.. That's what people said about the NSA.. If you make bullshit changes to a license you damn well better know what you're doing and programmers usually don't when it comes to licenses.
Again, as a Debian user I want to see this garbage get kicked out of Debian and let's make something a lot better that's actually "free".
Lawyers absolutely *LOVE* undefined "good/evil" terms in licenses, because they can be bent and twisted to mean anything they want them to mean! In fact in one court case it can be twisted to mean one thing and in another it can be twisted to mean the opposite. That's why the GPL and other well written licenses doesn't have this kind of crap.
Last edited by Sidicas; 08-22-2013 at 05:14 AM.
Of course there hasn't. This is PHP we're talking about. It gains hot new features years after they've matured in other languages....a new JSON extension for PHP is being planned but hasn't been merged yet and there hasn't been a status update in some time.
It was the FSF who coined and defined the term "Free Software", and the very same FSF also wrote the first (and every subsequent) version of GPL. So saying "GPL isn't free" is as incorrect as it can be, GPL is the very reference implementation of a Free Software License.
This isn't a "trivial" deal, telling people they can't use software inherently makes it nonfree. It also leaves 'good' and 'evil' undefined and up to the interpretation of a court of law... which can be ridiculous.