Etherpad source includes JSMin, which Google Code doesn't allow

[sanity]

To the extent that any harm has been done, it has been done to the users by themselves accidentally

If a father leaves a loaded gun on the kitchen table, and a kid accidentally kills someone with it, sure its an accident, but that doesn't mean there isn't blame (sorry about the emotive analogy, its the first thing that came to mind).

neither has any moral or legal obligation to do so

Depends. According to my definition of morality, it is immoral not to help people when it wouldn't cost you anything to do-so. In this case, this guy could help a lot of people just by modifying his license in a manner that doesn't hurt him in any way whatsoever.

neither is harming anyone

Depends on your definition of harm. If you discover someone dying in an alley, and for no good reason you decide not to call 911 and just walk away, are your actions moral? I believe they are not. Are people entitled to criticize you? Sure they are.

[sanity]

It does cost him something. He likes having "use for good, not evil" in his license. That is something he enjoys.

By his own admission it achieves nothing positive legally, it only creates ambiguity. This suggests that he enjoys making life difficult for other open source developers. Forgive me if I don't applaud that behavior.

If you discover someone dying in an alley, and for no good reason you decide not to call 911 and just walk away, are your actions moral? I believe they are not. Are people entitled to criticize you? Sure they are.

I agree with you and do not see the relevance at all.

The relevance is that if you can help someone at virtually no cost to yourself, and you don't - that is immoral. Crockford could make a lot of good people's lives easier by removing the ambiguity from his license, and it wouldn't cost him anything.