[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: OSD && DFSG - different purposes - constructive suggestion!

On Tue, 2003-03-11 at 00:16, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> David Turner <novalis@novalis.org> 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

Reply to: