Raul Miller wrote:
I wish I knew why you think it's evil for Debian to distribute non-free. You've stated that it's an ethical issue for you. You've drawn an analogy with illegal drugs. You've stated that it's not good for Debian's developers or users [regardless of any good that the software does, and regardless of any freeness in that software]. But your arguments seem to be circular -- without basis.
I will try to present an example. Let's say we have program 'A' without permition to distribute modified sources. It's not absolutely non-free - you have freedom to learn how program works, to modify it for your own needs, to distribute it without modifications. It is unique and there is no free analog.
If developer agrees with such a limitation he is not able to modify this program to help his friend to adapt it for his needs. Developer will not be able to distribute modifications to others who also need such an improvenment. This contradicts human ethics, because help is ethical.
Any single person can decide to ignore this non-ethical limitation on helping other people (and will act ethical, because helping other people is more ethical than violating the will of author in this case). Debian is not able to act this way because of the legal issues (and legality is important, otherwise Debian will not survive). So, by agreeing to such a licence, Debian compel himself to non-ethical actions.
-- Best regards, Sergey Spiridonov