On Mon, 24 Sep 2012 23:29:11 +0900 Osamu Aoki wrote: [...] > I also think if a person is a real dissident who is determind to violate > lethal legal requirements of his regime, he will not hesitate to violate > a petit legal requirement of the license text. He will use any tools > available in his hand to change his regime. So why worry about > unenforceable part of the license text. That is what I think. As far as I see it, the rationale here is that the dissident is considered as an outlaw in his/her *own* totalitarian state. But, if he/she is compelled to violate the license of a piece of software, he/she may face legal issues even *abroad*, in other, (more) democratic countries (where the copyright holders of the piece of software may live). This is unfair and it's due to the license. Such a license should be regarded as including a non-free restriction, that discriminates against dissidents in totalitarian regimes (DFSG#5). So, I disagree with you: in my own personal opinion, the dissident test is a useful means to spot non-free restrictions and should not be abandoned. -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/frx-gpg-key-transition-2010.txt New GnuPG key, see the transition document! ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE
Attachment:
pgpitifxtplKF.pgp
Description: PGP signature