lex@cc.gatech.edu wrote:
[Personally, I think all of our "tests" should be explicitly tied to some practical concern so we have some basis for reasoning when unanticipated situations arise.]This is really about freedoms. You don't want to *lose* freedoms (the right to criticize the author, sue third parties, etc.) by getting a free software license.I vehemently disagree.
That's interesting. I propose the following license then. Is it free in your opinion? It doesn't technically violate any DFSG clauses, but I think it's self-evidently non-free, because it takes away fundamental freedoms.
Anyone ("you") may use, copy, modify, and distribute copies (modified or unmodified) of this software, provided that:
(1) You must never say or write anything negative about the authors.(2) You agree never to exercise your fair use, fair dealing, or other similar rights regarding this software. (3) You agree not to use this program at all, in any way, without agreeing to this license.
(3) You agree never to sue anyone over anything.(4) You agree to allow the authors to search your home and person without notice at any time. (5) You agree to waive your right to trial by jury in all criminal or civil cases brought against you.
Debian is not about freedom in general. It is about free software, a loose term which we have carefully defined.
Wrong; the DFSG do not comprise a definition.
Yes, that's fine, we agree. The world does not belong in Debian "main" either. If someone wants to package it, it should go in "non-free". ;-)Insisting on freeing the world at the same time is too much.