Re: Third party code license issue
On Sunday 04 Mar 2012, Paul Elliott wrote:
> I do not think the authors of the DFSG intended to endorse the use of
> software for evil. And I don't think Evil is a "Field of endeavor".
> Most people know, or think they know, when they are doing evil. I
> also do not think the the distinction between Good and Evil is any
> more ambiguous than the term "field of endeavor".
There are religions, philosophies and schools of thought that do not
look at thoughts, deeds and words in simplistic black and white terms;
consequently these credos do not have any intrinsic concept of good or
evil. As an adherent of one of these schools of thought, I am unable to
meaningfully parse the original author's requirement.
Again speaking for myself, I would disagree with your last assertion
above: the distinction between "Good" and "Evil" is not at all
unambiguous and, if it can be defined at all, wholly dependant on
context.
> But because of nihilism of our times, the courts are unlikely to
> interpret "Good and Evil". The clause should be taken as an
> exhortation rather than a legal requirement. In our times, those who
> favor Good over Evil should be encouraged rather than discouraged.
> They should be given every benefit of doubt.
Only meaningful in specifically dualistic philosophies and world views.
The only objective of this mail is to share a perspective on the issue,
not to get into a theistic or religious debate.
Regards,
-- Raj
--
Raj Mathur || raju@kandalaya.org || GPG:
http://otheronepercent.blogspot.com || http://kandalaya.org || CC68
It is the mind that moves || http://schizoid.in || D17F
Reply to: