Can we add the following license to Fedora? I mean that it would become acceptable for packages. I was told that I should write the reasons to use it instead of an existing one. I think that this could show the variety of cultures that make Fedora the best.
Link to license: http://www.ojuba.org/wiki/_export/raw/waqf/license
The reasons:
1. It's not new, Waqf had been used to boost scientific advance in Islamic civilization for centuries. 2. If the law allow us to have some thing as a property, then we (the owners) have the right to make what we own as waqf. 3. We need to show our different vision, motivation and ethical background, we are not doing this because we are communist nor socialist nor capitalists who feel pathetic..etc. nor what ever background. 4. In the forth term we made an obligation on distributing the modifications that it must be known the the end user that this is a modification.
Other helpful links http://www.ojuba.org/wiki/_export/raw/waqf/faq
Thanks in advance
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Tareq Al Jurf wrote:
Can we add the following license to Fedora? I mean that it would become acceptable for packages. I was told that I should write the reasons to use it instead of an existing one. I think that this could show the variety of cultures that make Fedora the best. Link to license: http://www.ojuba.org/wiki/_export/raw/waqf/license
Not sure about using a license where the English version has no legal effect, but this license is unacceptable on it's face anyway:
" * **First - Usage :** The user may use the work for any good purpose and he may not use it to harm others or violate the permissive principles of Islam ((Some scholars use the term Maqasid Alsharia and summarize them by saying that it aims to protect people rights in religion, lives, sanity, breed, and properties.)). Notice that any work that is most likely harmful can't be put under Waqf in the first place."
This is a field of use restriction, which is unacceptable for Fedora.
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 05:10:40PM +0300, Tareq Al Jurf wrote:
Can we add the following license to Fedora? I mean that it would become acceptable for packages. I was told that I should write the reasons to use it instead of an existing one. I think that this could show the variety of cultures that make Fedora the best.
Link to license: http://www.ojuba.org/wiki/_export/raw/waqf/license
The first clause about works only used for good seems fairly ambiguous to me. It is not clear where the boundaries of good/bad are, limited to the priciples of Islam or otherwise.
For example, if someone were to create software that was intended for security exploit research, it could be used for both good (helping identify security holes) and bad (exploiting security holes) purposes.
josh
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 05:10:40PM +0300, Tareq Al Jurf wrote:
Can we add the following license to Fedora? I mean that it would become acceptable for packages. I was told that I should write the reasons to use it instead of an existing one. I think that this could show the variety of cultures that make Fedora the best. Link to license:�[1]http://www.ojuba.org/wiki/_export/raw/waqf/license
Assuming the translation is reasonably accurate, the license is not a free software license, and therefore is not acceptable for Fedora. The principal problem is the section that says:
The user may use the work for any good purpose and he may not use it to harm others or violate the permissive principles of Islam . . . . Notice that any work that is most likely harmful can't be put under Waqf in the first place.
This imposes use restrictions based on moral or religious criteria. Licenses containing similar requirements have been rejected by Fedora: see, e.g., the JSON.org license (http://www.json.org/license.html), and the HESSLA (http://www.hacktivismo.com/about/hessla.php). See also: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/hessla.html
- RF
-
Jon Stanley -
Josh Boyer -
Richard Fontana -
Tareq Al Jurf