I just had this hare-brained idea, and I mean it seriously. However, please be gentle with the responses if you find it particularly stupid -- it probably makes no sense to people who are smarter than I.
One of the ways that copyleft works is by mandating that users of modified versions of GPL'd code are required to share their modifications with anyone who asks. What if, going forward, users of GPL'd code are required to post the way that their tools are being used?
Obviously there are issues with this:
1. Where do they have to post? 2. Is that posting place communal? If so, who pays to host it? 3. How do you guarantee that they are being truthful? 4. and on and on.
But, my thought is publishing can draw public attention to malicious/evil/unethical uses. That public attention is often more effective in generating change than law/license and costs less than litigation.
A requirement to post FLOSS software usage?
One of the ways that copyleft works is by mandating that users of modified versions of GPL'd code are required to share their modifications with anyone who asks. What if, going forward, users of GPL'd code are required to post the way that their tools are being used?
Obviously there are issues with this:
1. Where do they have to post?
2. Is that posting place communal? If so, who pays to host it?
3. How do you guarantee that they are being truthful?
4. and on and on.
But, my thought is publishing can draw public attention to malicious/evil/unethical uses. That public attention is often more effective in generating change than law/license and costs less than litigation.
What do people think about this?