License violates Open Source Definition

[akuckartz]

The license is not an Open Source license. This condition violates the Open Source Definition (OSD):

without commercial gain

The OSD states in clause 6:

No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor

The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.

Rationale: The major intention of this clause is to prohibit license traps that prevent open source from being used commercially. We want commercial users to join our community, not feel excluded from it.
http://opensource.org/osd-annotated

My suggestion is to use one of OSI-certified licenses:
http://opensource.org/licenses/category

A license such as the AGPL 3.0 might be an option for you because it makes it difficult to use the code in or in connection with closed source software (if that is your main reason for your non-commercial condition).

[akuckartz]

Ping!

[palmirani]

The license of LIME is based on MIT.
  mp

  Il 18/02/2016 22:20, Andreas Kuckartz ha scritto:



  Ping!
  —
    Reply to this email directly or view
      it on GitHub.













-- 

Associate professor of Legal Informatics
School of Law
Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna
C.I.R.S.F.I.D. http://www.cirsfid.unibo.it/
Palazzo Dal Monte Gaudenzi - Via Galliera, 3
I - 40121 BOLOGNA (ITALY)
Tel +39 051 277217
Fax +39 051 260782

E-mail [email protected]

[akuckartz]

@palmirani The MIT license does not contain this condition:

If it is used for purposes having commercial gains, an agreement with the copyright holders is required.

[duncan-crane]

Hi @palmirani
I wondered if this is still a 'live' project as it hasn't been updated since 2017? Also, was the question raised by @akuckartz resolved (eg the non compliant clause removed)?