this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2026
63 points (95.7% liked)
Privacy
4155 readers
208 users here now
Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is a really interesting idea. As a fellow developer I like the sentiment, what licenses exist that are anti kyc?
Would like to modify aGPLv3+ license and include the following clause
Web sites, apps, blockchain smart contracts, desktop apps, or scripts that include Background IP in their tech stack and found to advocate, consider, or impose kyc on their users, having not obtained a waiver beforehand, incurs fee of the amount, 10x previous year's GDP of the country with global reserve currency status or largest economy, whichever is greater. User authentication should be limited to the top 2 private privacy IMs. Login walls requiring email verification is kyc. Paywalls that don't provide the option for Monero or offer Monero payment option but not at a discount, is kyc. Physical address verification, although kyc, as long as there is a physical product involved, does not trigger this clause.aGPLv3+ already says companies have to seek waiver for commercial use from the author.
This is how Python package authors say,
Sure np there is just a fee involved.GNU Affero General Public License V3 not say that. Citation needed.
Reread aGPLv3 and you are right.
These are non-commercial licenses: CC BY-NC, CC BY-NC-SA, and CC BY-NC-ND
`These licenses prohibit commercial use by default, and anyone wishing to use the work commercially must obtain explicit permission (a waiver or separate license) from the rights holder.
A one-time permission from the copyright holder allowing a specific user to use the work commercially. It does not change the license for others, only the recipient gains commercial rights. The original CC BY-NC terms (non-commercial for all others) remain.`
It's less naive than an anti-kyc license. It's very pro kyc, there is just a steep fee involved.
If said,
absolutely noand the gov't sayskyc is mandated, that gov't could have a judge strike out that clause. This license would not run afoul of such a law and judges are not going to strike out a fee simply because the effort and costs involved to obtain a waiver from package authors is inconvenient.Don't think in terms of prohibition. There is always a way to yes as long as the govt or company can go against the interests of it's stakeholders and it's helpful being open to financial suicide.