Re: "Waqf" General Public License in Debian?
"Christoph Anton Mitterer" <calestyo@scientia.net> wrote:
>Hey....
>
>Well I guess that it's much easier to judge what's evil and what's not.
>
>Typically all peoples that took part in the Enlightenment a scientific
>development came to similar rules, which you can find things like:
>- Universal Declaration of Human Rights
>- European Convention on Human Rights
>- as well as the human rights found in the constitutions of many western
>countries (as well as some others).
>
>It may sound arrogant, but what ever contradicts such rules or tries to
>abolish them is evil.
>
>
>But I guess this discussion leads to nothing.... so back to this special
>case...
>
>
>
>
>I'm not against religious software in Debian per se, but as with many
>other things that we do not accept (see Debian Multimedia) or patented
>stuff, it's always a big danger.
>
>Why don't we then include legally questionable packages like aacskeys or
>dumphd in Debian? Their license should be fine, and there are surely
>some countries around the world in which they're legal.
>
>It's always the question where to make the cut. Someone mentioned
>pornography as an example. I guess we allow this because it's legal in
>most countries. What would we do with a package "child-pornography" in
>Debian if the license is GPL?
>
>Many people feel discriminated even by seeing or living with religious
>people (e.g. in Germany and Europe there is the long standing issue of
>having the christian cross in schools). Would we e.g. accept it if all
>the Desktop wallpaper packages contain the star of david?
>Guess that the countries of some that argued here that Debian is for
>all, would be the first that completely forbid Debian...
>
>I think that computing itself an in the end also Debian originates from
>and grounds on top of the ideas of what I noted above: Enlightenment,
>natural sciences, et cetera.
>And all this is not (or should not be) under law of any god, or the
>pope, or Sharia or whatever.
>
>If something obviously fights those idea, it looses (IMHO) the right to
>take.
>Which leads me to close the circle and come to and end:
>If license is clearly against all in what we all (hopefully) believe,
>even if it's just the preamble or an upstream who seems to have the
>impression that we should bow to some other "rules"... then personally
>I'd prefer to close the doors.
>
>Ah and again, this is definitely not anti-Islamism... if I'd see similar
>things from other religions or creationism or e.g. Nazis,... I'd say the
>same.
>
No. It is ignorant anti-religious bigotry. Please take your prejudices elsewhere, they are quite unrelated to Debian development.
Scott K
Scott K
Reply to: