Re: Open Software License v2.1
Bernhard R. Link writes:
> * Michael Poole <firstname.lastname@example.org> [040915 15:00]:
> > On the other hand, I always thought free software was about protecting
> > users, not patent litigants who are supposed to already have working
> > forms of the patented invention.
> What about people selling non-free software, builders of nuclear bombs,
> terrorists, criminals, US-goverment agents, abortion medics,
> religious fundamentals, communists, lawyers, ...
(Your choice whether that describes you or an item you omitted. If
you want to make a serious attempt to apply DFSG #5 or #6 to patent
termination, I'm listening, but please craft your argument so that it
does not classify the GPL as non-free because it discriminates against
people who want to sell binary-only versions of free software.)