Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >It seems to me that the "dissident test" is just a weird way of saying >something like: > >DFSG 11. Licence Must Not Invade Privacy of Individuals or Groups
Right. That's the sort of conclusion I'm coming to. If it /is/ actually effectively another criterion, then the right way to go about it is by changing the DFSG. I don't think it really exists there at the moment, and so I think trying to test packages against it is unreasonable. >If it's too hard to come up with a realistic example of a group that >everyone agrees is deserving of privacy then perhaps it's best to just >leave it as an abstract requirement. I'd agree. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
