50
The Hippocratic License 3.0: An Ethical License for Open Source.
(firstdonoharm.dev)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2025
50 points (81.2% liked)
Programming
21381 readers
171 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The term "open source software" was coined specifically to refer to software licensing that recognizes a particular set of freedoms. It is not a generic term for source-available software, and never was.
One of the freedoms of open source is "no discrimination against fields of endeavor."
Calling the Hippocratic license family "open source" is inaccurate, since its entire goal is to discriminate against certain fields of endeavor.
It's better described as a sort of source-available license.
The problem with that reasoning is that precedence and origin do not necessarily define language use after it. Language evolves. Society and communities make up new or change definitions.
Misuse of the term is evidence that it's not universally understood to be one way.
I think it's mainly because "open source" can be understood as accessible, readable source. And many people seem to intuitively understand it as such. The "free" terminology on the other hand has a more ambiguous meaning between freedom and no cost. And early on, the "freeware" terminology was established as a differentiation to "free software". "Open source" does not have such an equivalent established differentiation (like "source-available", which seems to be just not as prevalent, maybe because there have been much fewer products with that alone).
I understand the desire to correct, specifically with the established OSD. But I have to wonder if it will ever bear fruit, given these circumstances. And in consequence, whether it's even worth to point out.