Re: OSD && DFSG - different purposes - constructive suggestion!
On Tue, 2003-03-11 at 00:16, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> David Turner <email@example.com> writes:
> > On Mon, 2003-03-10 at 08:04, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > > > Sure. Compare this to some code using the GPL; same sort of information,
> > > > same problem with it: their trade secrets are woven into the functionality
> > > > of the code itself.
> > >
> > > In that case you can simply choose to distribute the program only to
> > > people you trust. You can't do this if the license carries an
> > > obligation to distribute to a fixed third party, too.
> > Interesting! I am inclined to agree with this, and point out that the
> > AGPL basically puts users in the category of people you have to trust.
> > The question is, who needs to be in this category? Do users? Sniffen
> > (who secretely wants to write proprietary software) and Bushnell (whose
> > heart is in the right place) say no. I think Towns says yes (as do I).
> Note Barak Perlmutter's newly proposed "tentacles of evil" test:
> 3. The Tentacles of Evil test.
> Imagine that the author is hired by a large evil corporation
> and, now in their thrall, attempts to do the worst to the users
> of the program: to make their lives miserable, to make them stop
> using the program, to expose them to legal liability, to make
> the program non-free, to discover their secrets, etc. The same
> can happen to a corporation bought out by a larger corporation
> bent on destroying free software in order to maintain its
> monopoly and extend its evil empire. The license cannot allow
> even the author to take away the required freedoms!
I don't think that reads on this situation.
-Dave Turner Stalk Me: 617 441 0668
"On matters of style, swim with the current, on matters
of principle, stand like a rock." -Thomas Jefferson