Hacker News Reader

Comment by btilly | Hacker News Reader

I think of that every time I hear about the IBM exemption to jslint's license. See http://dev.hasenj.org/post/3272592502 for what that is if you do not know.

It is only funny until you realize the likely reason that IBM's lawyers are taking that term so seriously. (You think they don't still have clients who are despotic dictators?)

View on HN

The jslint thing happens because no sane corporate lawyer would ever sign off on a contract that says "X may not be used for evil", where "evil" is completely unspecified in the contract. What happens if Crockford decides one day that all online advertising is "evil"?

Has nothing at all to do with wanting to be evil; it has to do with liability and a cute, but legally-unwise license.

If so, then does no other large company that wants to use jslint ever raise the issue? And why has it happened multiple times with IBM?

I suspect that Crockford gets letters from other companies, but calling out IBM makes for a better story. That's just a guess, though.

The purpose of "do no evil" clauses, as I see them, is to weed out users who take such clauses seriously. People like the Debian project, or IBM.

If the serious grumps are willing to play along and ask for an exception, then you may as well throw them a bone. In receiving such a request you've already extracted amusement from them.

I have a bizarre fascination with companies that produce(d) the technology that is (was) used in evil ways by the wrong people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_companies_involved_in_t...

IBM are just as bad now. UK surveillance, supplying massive US defence companies. You name it. Nasty bunch.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com