On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 01:22:49AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > On Wed, Jul 21, 2004 at 12:00:04PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 11:54:24AM -0400, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote: > > > Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > This is a slightly different problem to that of a local law which says > > > > "you > > > > can't do that". I'm not distributing prohibited technology to an > > > > embargoed > > > > location by choice. I never thought "hmm, wouldn't it be cool if I sent > > > > this to Iran". Instead, the terms of the licence are forcing me to do > > > > that. > > > > > > Almost -- they force you to do that if you modify and distribute. So > > > you don't have freedom with respect to the software, because you can't > > > modify and distribute without the license urging you to potentially > > > break the law. > > > > So, what, vote with your feet, and leave the country which impose such > > ridicoulous constraint on you. No sympathy from me there. > > DFSG #13: any licence that requires you to move country in order to exercise > the granted permissions is not free. Sheesh.
Ok, well, which would mean all licence are non-free, especially if you consider things like crypto, patents and distributing your software to cuba, so ... Friendly, Sven Luther
