GPL – How to Re-license BSD 2/3-Clause Code to GPL

What's wrong with gaining some notoriety if someone makes a well-known piece of software using your code?

(The issue is not with someone using your code. The issue is with someone using your name or your product's name as an endorsement for their code or actions ... and giving you or your code a bad reputation as a result.)

I can think of a number things that could be wrong with that kind of notoriety:

• it could reduce your options in getting employment
• it could drive away current or potential sponsors (for an open source project)
• it could reduce your chances of getting further research funding (for an academic),
• it could deter paying customers (for a company)
• it could attract unwarranted attention from law enforcement
• it could attract opportunistic or vindictive lawsuits
• it could make you a target for a social media hate storm.

Also, wouldn't dictating what users can and cannot do with your given name fall outside the domain of intellectual property?

The "domain of intellectual property" is not a concept that has any significance to the enforceability of the terms of a license.

What matters is whether people who want to use the licensed material are prepared to accept the license conditions that you have set. As the owner of the IP, you are entitled to place any conditions on its use that you want to^*. Other people can then choose to use the material subject to the conditions, or not use it at all.

^{* - Actually, there probably are limits on what conditions you can set. A condition requiring someone to perform an illegal act is probably illegal, and definitely unenforceable. Also, legal but "unconscionable" conditions are likely to fail a challenge in a lawsuit. IANAL - talk to one if you need legal advice.}

From your comments, it appears that you're looking for a way to license a library that you wrote so you can use it in a proprietary project but still have the license be GPL-compatible.

First off, this is a bit nonsensical. The GPL carries a whole lot of anti-proprietary-software ideological baggage with it. It's designed that way; the whole point of it is to make it as difficult as possible to integrate GPL or LGPL code into a proprietary project.

However, licenses are for other people. They don't apply to the copyright owner, which is you, the person who wrote the library. You can use your own code however you want to, regardless of the terms of the license you put on it. So you can make it GPL or LGPL and still use it in your proprietary project and you'll be fine.

On the other hand, if you want people in general to be able to use it in GPL projects or also to be able to use it in proprietary projects but still be required to publish the source to whatever changes they make, try dual-licensing it as (L)GPL and MPL.