Re: Password disclosure?
- To: Bas Wijnen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Cc: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: Password disclosure?
- From: Free Ekanayaka <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 08:02:11 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] email@example.com>
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org> (Francesco Poli's message of "Thu, 21 Jul 2005 22:19:55 +0200")
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
|--==> Francesco Poli writes:
FP> On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 10:17:29 +0100 Free Ekanayaka wrote:
FP> | >>zynaddsubfx is also a must
FP> | The licence is a bit "strange", I know, but it is still the
FP> | softsynth with the best sounds that come out of the box.
FP> Well, what's strange with the GNU GPL v2?
>>"Please don't use this program to make music that is against God and
>>Jesus Christ. Realize that the only way to the Salvation is Jesus
>>Christ. Please don't lose this chance and don't make others to lose
FP> Well, that's a "Please don't do this": it's a kind *request*, not a
FP> legally binding *requirement*.
FP> Upstream authors seem to be Christian fundamentalists or something like
FP> At least, that's what appears from the notice you quoted...
FP> They probably would *not* be pleased, if, say, Marilyn Manson used
FP> zynaddsubfx in his artistical production; but they (seem to) want their
FP> software to be free, so they do not discriminate against any field of
FP> endeavor: they just advice against uses they feel as unethical.
FP> I fail to see anything non-free or troublesome in all this.
Yes, I think you're right. I just reported what I thought was the
issue here... I don't know what Paul Naska (author) would do in case
his program were used by Marilyn Manson (he could even change the
license), but that's to the case now.