License stuff came up the other day. Got me wondering.

Could I use something like the mit or GPL license, but add a requirement that anyone that uses the software had to send me a pic of their butthole?

What is the use case for this GPL + bhole license?

Memes mostly. It world also need to have an age of majority clause.

Then if the library actually gets picked up somewhere it would be a good extortion tactic.

  • neidu2@feddit.nl
    1·
    4 months ago

    Fun fact: Buttholes are unique in the same way that fingerprints are. So resubmitting with a new picture can be used as proof of identification and thereby licensing.

    Why do I know this, you wonder? Eons ago I stumbled across this anus recognition software source base. The idea was that it could one day be used for identification instead of retina scanning.

  • Ephera@lemmy.ml
    0·
    4 months ago

    You can write any conditions you want into a license.

    That’s what actually differentiates proprietary licenses from open-source licenses.
    Open-source licenses follow certain rules, and you usually select an existing license, so therefore they can be reasoned about, collectively. People often implicitly mean “OSI-approved license”, when they talk of “open-source licenses”.
    Proprietary licenses, on the other hand, can contain whatever bullcrap you want.

    Having said that, I’m not a lawyer, but I imagine, if you also called your license “GNU General Public License”, then a case could probably be made in court, that your license is deliberately confusing.

    • federalreverse-old@feddit.de
      0·
      4 months ago

      Oracle Java uses a license called “GPL with Classpath Exception”, so it’s definitely possible to create derivatives of the GPL and name them appropriately.

      • Ephera@lemmy.ml
        0·
        4 months ago

        Wow, I’ve definitely seen that before, but I never realized how wild that is. So many companies will start drooling like a dumbass when anything contains the GPL.

        So, it’s not like they can’t ever use GPL software, most do use Linux knowingly or unknowingly. But if you use GPL software in a way the legal department hasn’t seen before, they’ll always feel uneasy about it.

        Frankly, I’m surprised that Java gained any traction in the corporate world at all, then.

        • federalreverse-old@feddit.de
          0·
          4 months ago

          The original version of Java was proprietary. Sun later open-sourced large parts of it but they kept selling a version of Java with a proprietary license. There were also random kerfuffles over the years with IBM and Red Hat who wanted to sell open-source Java into large organizations without giving a cut to Sun/Oracle.