Re: Fwd: FilterProxy and DFSG-compliancy?
On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 10:59:44PM +0100, Kenneth Vestergaard Schmidt wrote:
> I have attached LICENSE to this post - hope nobody minds, it's only 3.6kb. I
> really need some input on this - would it be against the DFSG? I wouldn't
> think so, only the long description should contain the license, and
> README.Debian should probably contain a notice. But should it go in non-free?
> Or is it totally against the DFSG?
What do you mean "totally against the DFSG"? If it's in non-free, it's
against the DFSG.
> I am quite serious about this. In case that wasn't clear, you may not
> do the following things with FilterProxy:
> Remove naughty words
> Remove pornography
> Remove "harmful ideas" in any form
> Enforce access policies.
> *UNLESS* you have the express knowledge and consent of the person whose
> web content is being filtered. Said person must know exactly what is
> being filtered. This is just so that unscrupulous individuals don't
> install FilterProxy as a netnanny-type filtering system, and force their
> views on others using it.
It's been said on debian-devel, but I'll say it again: non-free. This
goes against the fields of endavour clause; it's not a matter of
whether we approve of the use or not. (IMO, it sucks; if you want to
remove pornongraphy from stuff coming into your system, you should
be able to, and your kids or employees can deal.)
--
David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org
Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org
"I don't care if Bill personally has my name and reads my email and
laughs at me. In fact, I'd be rather honored." - Joseph_Greg
Reply to: