Should machines that are used to create weapons part of that clause? Is a scout drone a weapon? Is the control software for that drone a weapon? What if it's a scout drone? What if this scout drone is used for reconnaissance by the coast guard to find criminals? What if it's used to find ships in peril and provide fast assistance? There are some black and white extremes, but there's also a lot of grey in between. I'd rather prefer my license to stay out of that mess. The GPL stipulates that apart from the restrictions in the GPL, no further restrictions can be applied to a software. But you're certainly free to license your code under a "no-weapons" clause, I just don't think that the GPL is the right place to do that.
I thought you said you worked in the industry? If you really did, then you'd know that more and more civilian grade technology is being used by military contractors to build military solutions. For this reason, such a clause would get complicated really fast:
- Is it ok to license audrino code under this license? (yes)
- Is it ok to combine other components with audrino under this license? (yes, for non-weapons)
- Can audrinos be used to build a drone? (yes)
- Can this drone be purchased by the government and it's contractors (yes)
- Can the military use the drones? (yes as long as it doesn't "kill or cause harm")
- Can this drone be used for reconnaissance? (yes as long as it doesn't "kill or cause harm")
ok, so now the military is using these drones all over the place. Pictures are taken, stored in databases, and distributed throughout the military. Eventually, some of those pictures are used to strategically bomb an insurgent encampment. Who violated the license?
Even better, what it were Google who purchased the drones and Google maps was instead used for the bombing strategy. Who's at fault now?
I did work in the industry before I developed some sense.
You distinctly miss the point there. Military hardware is controlled heavily. No commercial entities use their data. That chain if events doesn't waist and never will.
There is a wall between the two sides that is rarely crossed.
Which is entirely not true. The fire scout drone for example is a military development based on the Schweizer 330 civilian heli. The S-434 is partially based on changes developed for the Fire Scout drone. The Bell Eagle Eye drone was initially conceived for the military but at a later stage, plans were made to make it a coast guard drone. Many helicopters have two versions, a civilian and a military version, for example the Bo-105 series which was extensively used by the german army but also formed the backbone of the german air ambulance network from the 1970s until the last one was replace in 2007. Which one of those is "military hardware"?
Most of technology initially conceived for military purposes was at some point repurposed for civilian use (Think: That packet-based network nowadays called 'The Internet')
