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

Re: "dissident test" has been proven wrong and should not be used any more

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 11:42:35PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> But this "dissident test" has been streched to the extreme and shot down
> many licenses as DFSG violation.


> * requiring to comply with law of the country is quite reasonable 
>   (GPL2.0 does. Many licenses also require export control compliance.)

No, it is not reasonable, and it is not DFSG-compliant.  If there are
licenses being allowed into Debian that are enshrining requirements to
comply with unrelated laws, that's something that needs to be corrected

Do you have a specific example of software in main whose license requires
the user/developer to comply with particular laws?  (Note that the GPL2.0
does NOT require compliance with the law; it only states that you may not
use other legal obligations as a justification for failure to comply with
the terms of the GPL.)

The DFSG does not allow licenses to discriminate against fields of
endeavour, and that absolutely includes illegal ones.  The law is sometimes
wrong; it's important that users of Debian not be exposed to double jeopardy
as a result, including in cases of civil disobedience.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: