↪ 2015-09-30 Wed 16:40, Antonello Lobianco (not reply) blackhole@lobianco.org:
Sorry, I forgot.. the motivation in not only the ethic of the software itself.. is that too often (at least in my sector, forest economics but economics in general as well) you see "results" arising from some sort of models that are described more or less in detail in the paper, but which software implementation is not available to really check the assumptions and the logic of the model.. I think it's a shame of the sector..
I believe what you are trying to fix is the fact that articles of scientific nature are not always “reproducible” or checkable because they're not making the source code available.
I agree that it's an important problem and that the ethical thing to do when you conduct or publish such research is to make source code available.
But I don't think that the proposed licensing tactic is the right way to address that. It's not a matter of software freedom.
Maybe you should look at “open access” tactics and push scientific journals to require making the software used available for other scientists.
Best,