Most of us do not care how software runs, whether that software is on our computers, our televisions, or our toasters - we just need it to work. However, part of the reason open source software has expanded is because it's in an ecosystem where developers and maintainers are trying to look at the code, use it, modify it, improve it, and even redistribute it. In fact, this concept is so integral to open source software, that many open source software licenses demand that any projects derived from licensed work also be open source, and allow others to use it, copy it, modify it, and distribute it. So, if a company does not adhere to the terms of the license, can you, as a consumer who should have the ability to view the source code of your smart appliances, sue them for breach of contract? If you can, what does that mean for open source software licenses, including ethical open source software licenses, going forward?
Advancing Ethical Licensing and the Launch of Hippocratic License 3.0
CAL, in partnership with the Organization for Ethical Source (OES), has launched Hippocratic License 3.0 (HL 3.0), an ethical open source software license designed to: (1) offer software developers a license that clearly defines what kind of behavior a potential licensor must adhere to, by basing the ethical standards section of HL 3.0 in international human rights norms; (2) extend software developers the ability to add additional ethical standards clauses to further champion a variety of specific human rights causes; (3) provide software developers the most enforceable ethical open software license to date; and (4) create an opportunity for victims of human rights violations to seek legal remedy through a private right of action.
Shell Shocked: Dutch Court Rules that Shell Must Reduce CO2 Emissions by 45% by 2030
While 100 companies are responsible for nearly three-fourths of global emissions contributing to climate change, governments have historically lacked the tools--or political will-- to effectively mitigate corporate contributions to climate change, even those that fossil fuel companies make.
However, a new ruling by a Dutch court may force change for corporate accountability on climate change.
Hamida Begum v. Maran (UK) Limited: Shipbreaker’s Death Turning the Tide in Third-Party Liability Claims Under English Law
While large shipping vessels are meant to last for years, all vessels eventually reach the end of their working lives. These vessels must then be dismantled, a process known as shipbreaking. Maran, a UK-based company, sold a shipping vessel to a demolition cash buyer to have its shipping vessel demolished. This post focuses on a decision issued by the Court of Appeals for England and Wales on March 20, 2021, against Maran’s appeal of the trial court’s decision denying Maran’s application for reverse summary judgment.