Re: RE-PROPOSED: The Dictator Test

[lex@cc.gatech.edu]

Matthew Palmer <mpalmer@debian.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 03:57:49PM -0400, lex@cc.gatech.edu wrote:
> > The Dictator Test goes well beyond DFSG.  DFSG clause 1 merely says
> > that there is no fee or payment for the software.  Nothing in DFSG says
> > that the license must make no requirements at all.  The Dictator
> > Test is a stronger test.
> 
> The dictator test, as I read it, does not say that a licence must make no
> requirements at all.  Every permission grant other than placing a work in
> the Public Domain would fail if that were the case.
> 

  "A licence is not Free if it prohibits actions which, in the absence
of
  acceptance of the licence, would be allowed by copyright or other
  applicable laws."

To be pedantic, I could have said: "Nothing in the DFSG says that a
license must make no prohibition whatsoever". Do you disagree with that
statement?  If you agree with the statement, then how do you base the
dictator test on DFSG?


Aside from the lack of connection, I see a downright problem: the
dictator test is relative to "applicable laws" which is a shifty concept
at best.  Applicable to whom?  Under what circumstances?  The dictator
test gives you different answers depending on what copyright and
"applicable" laws you decide that the test is talking about.  That just
can't be a good measure of DFSG-freeness, which lists specific things
the license must not prohibit regardless of the jurisdiction.


-Lex