|
|
|
|
|
|
by For_Iconoclasm
5192 days ago
|
|
|
> defining "evil" would be a good start I think the best way to tackle this would be defining specific tenets the way that the FSF does with freedoms 0-4. They don't just say "You have to be free!" ... there is the legally-binding license itself, containing some light legalese, as well as the 4 freedoms specifying the idea to the common man, despite clearly. So, a license that comprises "We won't be evil. We promise!" wouldn't be good enough, but the some clear rules could be set. The non-evil most people would care about would probably be related to privacy. I agree that specifying all of the business practices which many people believe are evil would be a non-trivial task dependent on the nature of the company. |
|
|