Yeah, that "good, not evil" clause sounds cool, but it's completely pointless in reality... the people using it for mass surveillance will certainly argue that what they're doing is for the pubic good, and may indeed believe it.

Current free software / open source licenses work because they can codify the behaviour they consider acceptable, with minimal ambiguity... you can use the code, but only under a well-specified set of terms. That becomes much harder if you want to encode broader ethical principles... you actually have to be able to define them in legal terms, such that you're not spending all your time tied up in court over edge cases and loopholes...