I am a researcher, and in my research I do a lot of programming. I am a big fan of the open-source concept – especially in research, where transparency and reproducibility is already a big part of the culture. I gladly contribute as much as I can to the community, and releasing my code for anyone to use is part of that.
However, in research there is always a certain measure of uncertainty about what the stuff you produce will be used for. I fully understand that I can’t copyright any results or conclusions – but I can protect how others use my code, and I would like to make sure that there is no (legal) way to incorporate software I produce in military applications.
I’ve read through a few of the shorter ones of the common OSS licenses, and summaries of some more, but they all seem to focus solely on the questions “do you earn money on my code?” and “do you make my code available with your program?” – nothing about what the program actually does with the code.
Are there any good open-source licenses that explicitly prohibit all kinds of military applications?
Update:
After reading up some more on how OSS works, I’ve realized that a license that meets my needs by definition will not be open-source, since open-source licenses cannot discriminate against fields. Thus, I’m rather looking for a license that is like an open-source license, except that it prohibits military use. I want this license to be already existing, authored or at least reviewed by someone who actually knows licensing, since I don’t.
Also, in response to a couple of remarks that this will be difficult to enforce: yes, I realize that. But this is more for myself than for the legal implications; if I use a license like this, and a military organization uses my code anyway, they are breaking the law and they are doing it despite my explicit instructions not to. Thus, the potentially gruesome things that they do with applications that include software I’ve written are no longer “on my conciousness”, since they stole the software from me. (And somewhere I have a naïve hope that if they need something I’ve done, and my license prohibits them from using it legally, they’ll get someone elses program that does the same thing and allows them to use it. Not that governments always do, but they always should abide by the law…)
It’s a moral safeguard, so to speak, rather than something I actually expect to bring up in court (if my mediocre code is ever used by CIA…)
24
How would one enforce such a license?
Would you prohibit any military use? If the software checks air pressure in tires, and someone decides to use it on a military Hummer, is that a prohibited use? Can people in the military industrial complex use it to plan their monthly picnic?
Would it be an acceptable use if the software improved ballistic missile trajectories, and the improved accuracy of the weapon prevented civilians from being killed? Or would any use in a weapon be prohibited?
These are the kinds of questions you have to ask yourself, if you want to make a software license that satisfies your sensibilities.
Nevertheless, I’d try an keep it simple. Yahoo’s Terms of Use state that their software must not be used
“to operate nuclear facilities, life support or other mission critical applications where human life or property may be at stake.”
That’s probably as good a clause as any, if you add the word “weapons” to the prohibited list of uses.
8
I found this explicitly non-military license for an encryption algorithm called OCB.
2.1 License.
Subject to your compliance with the terms of this license, including the restrictions set forth in Section 2.2, Licensor hereby grants to you a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, non-transferable, non-sublicenseable, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable license to practice any invention claimed in the Licensed Patents (i) for any Research Use, (ii) for any Noncommercial Use, and (iii) in any Software Implementation.2.2 Restrictions
2.2.1 The license above does not apply to and no license is granted for any Military Use of the Licensed Patents.
You ought to be able to modify it to refer to your own code, and be covered the way you want.
4
Here’s a starting point. It is Canadian Mind Products policy on “no military use” of their software. Canadian Mind Products is Roedy Green’s company. Roedy has done some absolutely brilliant work, that has not gotten nearly enough mainstream attention.
Full Disclosure: 1. Roedy is an old friend, although we’ve never met in person. 2. I don’t agree with him on this.
You might also look at Ben Kuipers “Why Don’t I Take Military Funding?”.
1
I can’t think of an example that has been tested in any court. The JSON license does state something that may be close to what you’re looking for. Note that it’s not considered open source because of that:
The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil.
There’s nothing preventing you from adding your own statement to and MIT license, for example.
5
Following the links on this page i found nothing up-to-date and available, neither the mentioned modified GPL nor the PeaceOSL. But you can read the latter here.
And I wouldn’t be sure how well defined the term any harm, which is their criteria, is in legal systems.
Maybe you want to contact the authors.