Re: Desert island test

[Ben Finney <bignose+hates-spam@benfinney.id.au>]

Ken Arromdee <arromdee@rahul.net> writes:

> consider this: if the bloody murderer will kill you if you reveal
> your identity (dissident test) the license demanding you do so is
> nonfree. But if the bloody murderer will kill you if you distribute
> source, the license demanding you do so is fine.
> 
> What principle can possibly be used to get that?

The principle that there are certain freedoms essential in a software
work for that work to be called free.

In the first case, the bloody lunatic imposes a condition ("do not
reveal your identity") that is not in opposition to the freedom of the
work. That is, the condition, if combined with a free work, does not
make the work non-free, because the essential freedoms remain
undiminished. The work remains free regardless of the lunatic's
imposed condition.

In the second case, the bloody lunatic imposes a condition ("do not
redistribute source code") that is directly opposed to at least one of
the essential freedoms in the work. That is, the condition, if
combined with a free work, makes the work non-free, because at least
one essential freedom has been compromised. Remove the lunatic's
imposed condition, and the work again becomes free.

-- 
 \      "Well, my brother says Hello. So, hooray for speech therapy."  |
  `\                                                    -- Emo Philips |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney