Glenn Maynard wrote: > On Sat, Jul 24, 2004 at 12:08:56PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > >>As is often mentioned, if you take DFSG6 that far, you could use it to >>argue that the GPL discriminates against the field of offering >>proprietary modified versions of the software. I don't think DFSG6 can >>sanely be taken that far, and I think it can only really be applied to >>"non-commercial use", "not for use in weapons research or development", >>and similar clauses. > > On reflection, I don't think that's really an argument that we shouldn't > interpret DFSG#6 that way; only that, upon doing so, we should apply it > with the same judgement required for the rest of the DFSG. [...] > Some people do argue that we, as a project, either can't or shouldn't > need to employ such judgement, and that the DFSG should be adjusted > to eliminate it; as I've said, I disagree.
Definitely; the DFSG should always be interpreted by good judgement, and not mechanically as a set of rules. - Josh Triplett
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
