* Andrew Suffield: > On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 09:42:30PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: >> * Andrew Suffield: >> >> > No, the clause hasn't really changed. It's still non-free for all the >> > same reasons. >> >> Your indirect support of software patents disturbs me. > > This (unstated) argument says that nuclear disarmement is an action > supporting nuclear weapons.
The MAD analogy is certainly there, but I mainly view the offending license clauses as promising attempts at non-proliferation.
