@alexia @cwg1231 Because not everyone is going to ignore the law, but anyone who's already ignoring the law (by violating human rights) is probably fine with ignoring copyright law too.

The GPL is useful despite the existence of some companies (like Allwinner) that continue to violate it, and it being reviewed by a lawyer is important because an overly broad clause could make everyone accidentally violate the license (which would make the license meaningless and equivalent to all-rights-reserved).

I think the clause of the OQL prohibiting materially supporting violators of human rights could plausibly be interpreted as prohibiting anyone who pays taxes from using the software, and this makes using any OQL-licensed software risky since the copyright holder could arbitrarily decide to sue you/tell you to stop using the software for this.

Another thing you could to to scare off companies from using your software without actually making it non-free is to require some sort of manifesto (similar to the GPL's preamble, or the Invariant Sections in various GNU manuals) to be distributed verbatim along with your software. Make it something that no company would want to distribute.