On Tue, 2003-03-11 at 00:10, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > David Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Because the four freedoms do talk about freedom to use the software, but > > don't say anthing about the freedom to *not* disclose source code under > > certain conditions. > > Why is this different from: > > "Because the four freedoms do talk about freedom to use the software, > but don't say anything about the freedom to *not* disclose your IRS > tax records"? > > The license could say: "You may copy this software, provided that you > provide a true copy of your tax returns upon request by the original > author of the software." We would reject that as nonfree, right?
Hm. Yes. So, I think we have to go back to looking at which restrictions we allow. For instance, we allow the GPL's section 4, which prohibits certain people (on account of their past actions) from copying, modifying, or distributing GPL'd software. Why? One answer is that it's the only way the GPL can be reasonably enforced. In Jeremy Hankins's suggested possible future, some AGPL-like (but better drafted) license is the only way we can keep Free Software as Free Software. So, let's move to that thread. -- -Dave Turner Stalk Me: 617 441 0668 "On matters of style, swim with the current, on matters of principle, stand like a rock." -Thomas Jefferson
