Re: one of the many reasons why removing non-free is a dumb idea
On Wed, 07 Jan 2004, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > > > > the fact that modified versions can not be redistributed
> > > > > really makes NO PRACTICAL DIFFERENCE to anyone at all.
>
> you are no worse off due to the existence of these non-free data
> sets.
Their existence or non-existence is not the point at issue here. You
claimed that an modifiability of a data set makes no practical
difference to anyone. The examples I gave are quite clearly cases
where the inability to modify makes a practical difference to me or
others.
> > We're discussing whether or not Debian should distribute works
> > that are not DFSG free, not whether we should allow our users to
> > use works that are non DFSG free.
>
> please stop pretending that there are no practical consequences to
> this.
We can discuss the practical consequences, but claiming that we will
stop our users from using non-free works is absurd. You can rightly
claim that we will make it more difficult for our users to use
non-free works and wax poetic on the number of man hours necessary to
add an appropriate source line to /etc/apt/sources.list, but to say
that we are inflicting our ideological choices on others by refraining
from distributing software that conflicts with our own guidelines or
subjects us to legal quandaries remains absurd.
Don Armstrong
--
Tell me something interesting about yourself.
Lie if you have to.
-- hugh macleod http://www.gapingvoid.com/archives/batch20.php
http://www.donarmstrong.com
http://www.anylevel.com
http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Reply to: