[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Desert island test

Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> wrote: [...]
> No, a license that doesn't follow the DFSG is non-free; a license that
> fails the dissident test is merely not useful for someone who wants to
> violate local law while obeying copyright law.
> The claim that protesting is a "field of endeavour", [...]

Why describe the dissident test as relying solely on the "field of
endeavour" (DFSG 6) guideline?  That's new and also seems like a strawman:
I think that it's clear that protesting is a field, but I don't think
identity-disclosure necessarily prevents protest.

Contrary to my previous message
in the discussion
(and the unattributed stuff on wiki.d.o),
the earliest claim that I've found about the dissident test is that
being forced to disclose one's identity is an unacceptable cost, in
so a license that fails the dissident test is breaking DFSG 1, 3
and/or 5.

FWIW, I don't think I've ever relied on the dissident test.

Hope that helps,
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

Reply to: