search

raisely / NoHarm

Do No Harm software license - A licence for using software for good
Other
398 stars 41 forks source link

Consider including "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" #36

Closed madiko closed 6 years ago

madiko commented 6 years ago

Thank you for this idea. You might want to consider specifying the licence. My suggestion would be to add the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The declaration states universal rights, many countries already have agreed upon. It includes most of the formerly issues as well: http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights

chrisjensen commented 6 years ago

Thank you for the contribution Madiko. When you say add the UDHR, do you mean referencing it, or including the articles verbatim in the license? Also, are there specific things that the UDHR covers that aren't covered by NoHarm? @tommaitland I think you might be more familiar with the UDHR than me, do you have anything to add?

madiko commented 6 years ago

Hey Chris,

I meant to link / reference to it in addition to your own text. The mentioned link is in all languages, professinoally translated. Good work by the UN ;-)

Appreciate your good work and may you have a nice day, Franziska

tommaitland commented 6 years ago

There articles covered by the UDHR that aren't covered adequately in No Harm – I did a quick check and was surprised, it's actually the majority.

We do have universal access to human rights listed in 4.b, so any organisation that frustrates access to human rights is excluded under the license – however we don't specify what human rights are. I think it'd be good to lean on the UDHR for this, it's probably just a matter of changing that line to:

access to the rights set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

This does expand the breadth of the license, many governments who may have been included before would be excluded by this change. Still, I'd be for it. The document has been agreed to by every member state of the UN, and it's not really a controversial set of rights.

chrisjensen commented 6 years ago

Sounds like a good idea. Should we also consider referencing the Convention on the Rights of the Child?

We might need to rethink the wording of 4b. Currently it is only restricted if organisations lobby against or derive a majority of income, but in this case, I would think really we would really want to exclude any organisation that simply engages in deliberately violating or frustrating this rights.

jeznag commented 6 years ago

I like this idea. It would presumably then prevent usage by companies involved in ICE/Australia's offshore detention regime.