Gregory's Server
I get the sentiment behind "Hippocratic" license. I just don't believe it works in practice as compared to free software licenses.
Hippocratic licenses are meant to prevent the software from being used to do harm, while free software skips the motivational part altogether and allows for any use. And I think it's for a good reason.
You see, you can't exactly KNOW the motivation of a person using a product. Thus, distributing a product will have to involve the way to somehow "prove" the validity and purity of their motivation. And even then you can't know it for sure unless you're a telepath.
So, instead of motivation, we'll have to see what they've actually done with the software. Consequences. This is retroactive, and I don't think that this is legally sound.
But then again, there's the case of a person who, having lied about their motivation, used the product to do harm. In this case, your license is not even working as intended: the harm is already done. What's the point, then?
I get the sentiment behind "Hippocratic" license. I just don't believe it works in practice as compared to free software licenses.
Hippocratic licenses are meant to prevent the software from being used to do harm, while free software skips the motivational part altogether and allows for any use. And I think it's for a good reason.
(Of course, I'm arguing from "shaping, prevention and harm reduction" model of lawmaking, as opposed to "crime and punishment" model. If punishment is what you want, then fine, go crazy, not like this model hasn't proven disasterous and draconian, but then again, it's may be what you want)