Re: Open Software License v2.1
* Andrew Suffield:
> On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 09:42:30PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Andrew Suffield:
>>
>> > No, the clause hasn't really changed. It's still non-free for all the
>> > same reasons.
>>
>> Your indirect support of software patents disturbs me.
>
> This (unstated) argument says that nuclear disarmement is an action
> supporting nuclear weapons.
The MAD analogy is certainly there, but I mainly view the offending
license clauses as promising attempts at non-proliferation.
Reply to: